JUDGMENT 1. - The instant revision has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 9.2.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangaria in revision, whereby the revisional court quashed the order dated 3.10.2007 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangaria taking cognizance against the respondents Nos. 2 to 6 for the offences under Sections 147, 341, 323 read with Section 149 of the I.P.C. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the revisional court has gone beyond the scope of its jurisdiction and has without any justification quashed the order taking cognizance passed by the learned Magistrate. He submits that the view expressed by the revisional court is totally in contravention to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jagdish Ram v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2004(1) WLC (SC) Cri. 545 : AIR 2004 SC 1734 . He thus prays that the revision deserves to be accepted and the order passed by the learned Revisional Court be quashed and that passed by the learned Magistrate be restored. 3. Per contra, Shri V.K. Bhadu learned counsel for the respondents Nos. 2 to 6 has vehemently opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the revisional court has rightly exercised the jurisdiction for quashing the order taking cognizance because the trial Court is took cognizance against the accused without considering the reasons given by the Police in the Final Report. 4. Heard and considered the arguments advanced at the bar and perused the orders impugned. 5. A bare perusal of the revisional court's order reveals that the revisional court has gone into appreciating and sifting the evidence as if it was finally deciding the case. At the stage of taking cognizance, only the existence of a prima-facie case is to be seen and nothing beyond that. The learned Magistrate while taking cognizance has applied his mind to the facts available on record including the police report and thereafter formed the opinion that there was sufficient material to proceed against the accused. As such, the order passed by the learned revisional court quashing the order taking cognizance cannot be said to be justified by any stretch of imagination. As such, the order passed by the learned revisional court quashing the order taking cognizance cannot be said to be justified by any stretch of imagination. It may be mentioned herein that the order taking cognizance is an exparte order and the deceased shall be at liberty to raise all their contentions/objections before the Magistrate at the stage of charges. 6. Resultantly, the revision succeeds and is allowed. The order dated 9.2.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangaria in revision is quashed and the order dated 3.10.2007 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangaria is hereby restored. 7. Record of the court below be sent back forthwith. Stay petition is also disposed of.Revision Allowed. *******