JUDGMENT 1. - The present misc. petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners who are the police employees challenging the order dated 02.06.2009 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pokran in Private Complaint Case No.4/2007 taking cognizance against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 385 and 392 IPC and summoning them through warrants of arrest. The said order has been affirmed in revision by the learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer by order dated 10.07.2009. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent No.2 was apprehended under Section 41 read with Section 109 Cr.P.C. and was produced before the SDM on 22.05.2007. On his so being produced, he did not make any complaint regarding any torture having been committed upon him by the police constables and the complaint has been filed belatedly. Learned counsel submits that the complaint was sent for enquiry to the police under Section 202 Cr.P.C., wherein, the allegations of the complainant were found to be false. Learned counsel thus submits that the order taking cognizance against the petitioners as well as the order of the learned revisional court affirming the same are unjust, illegal and abuse of the process of the court, as such, the same deserve to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has placed on record the application filed by the respondent No.2 before the SDM. The application is clearly to the effect that the respondent No.2 was brutally assaulted by the police officers at the police outpost and money was also snatched away from the respondent No.2. Not only this, bribe was also taken from the uncle of the respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 thereafter directed to be medically examined and on the directions of the SDM and on being so medically examined, number of injuries have been found on his person. Thus, he submits that the petitioners are guilty of committing custodial violence and no interference is called for in the impugned orders. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the orders impugned passed by the learned courts below and given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar. 5. This court is of the firm opinion that the learned Magistrate has committed no error in taking cognizance against the petitioners for the alleged offences. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the orders impugned passed by the learned courts below and given my thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar. 5. This court is of the firm opinion that the learned Magistrate has committed no error in taking cognizance against the petitioners for the alleged offences. Obviously, the respondent No.2 was a victim of police brutality and the learned Magistrate has rightly summoned the petitioners through warrants of arrest for the offences mentioned above. The order of the learned Magistrate has already been affirmed in revision as well.Resultantly, this misc. petition being bereft of force is hereby dismissed. Stay petition also stands disposed of.Petition dismissed. *******