JUDGMENT 1. - This misc. petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code has been preferred against the order dated 25.3.2006 whereby the revisional Court allowed the revision petition against the order dated 24.11.2004 whereby cognizance has been taken by the trial Court. 2. The short facts of the case are that the present petitioner fired a complaint before the learned Magistrate for the offence under Section 429 Indian Penal Code alleging therein that the respondents had mercilessly beaten the pet dog of the petitioner on 10.11.2004 and also inflicted injuries to both the eyes of the dog. After inquiry, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the respondents Nos. 2 to 5 for the offence under Section 429 Indian Penal Code but on revision, the order was set aside and hence this petition. 3. The contention of the present petitioner is that the order of the revisional Court is against the law and fact. The injuries were caused to the eyes of the dog due to which the dog has become disabled. He has further stated that the pet dog was called in the Court and the learned Magistrate observed the injuries of dog and there was prima facie evidence against the respondents for taking cognizance against them for the offence under Section 429 Indian Penal Code and the revisional Court was not justified in quashing the order taking cognizance. The learned revisional Court has passed the order as if it is sitting in appeal and deciding the matter finally. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there is no perversity in the order of the revisional Court. There is no allegation regarding ingredients of Section 429 Indian Penal Code in the complaint and even in the statements of the witnesses. Section 429 Indian Penal Code reads as follows : "429.-Mischief by killing or maiming cattle, etc., of any value or any animal of the value of fifty rupees.-Whoever commits mischief by killing, poisoning, maiming or rendering useless, any elephant, camel, horse, mule, buffalo, bull, cow or ox, whatever may be the value thereof, or any other animal of the value of fifty rupees or upwards, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description, for a term which may extend to five years, or with fine, or with both." 5. A bare perusal of Section 429 Indian Penal Code goes to show that to charge a person under Section 429 Indian Penal Code , it is necessary that mischief has been committed to render the animal useless. The original complaint, which was placed for perusal goes to show that there is no allegation in the complaint that the animal has rendered useless or it was of any use for the complaint and hence in absence of the allegation that the animal has become useless, cognizance under Section 429 Indian Penal Code could not be sustained. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the injuries were caused to both the eves of the dog and hence he has become useless. Injury report has also been placed for perusal, which goes to show that there is only one minor injury on. right eye. Doctor has specifically opined that the animal was not handicapped. Hence, there is no allegation about the ingredients, which will from the ingredients of the offence under Section 429 Indian Penal Code The present petitioner has also examined under Section 200 Indian Penal Code In his statement, he has said nothing about the use of the animal or he has stated nothing that due to mischief, the dog has become useless and other witness have not stated anything about this allegation. 6. Looking at the totality of the facts, cognizance has rightly been quashed and there is no infirmity in the impugned order.Petition dismissed. *******