JUDGMENT & ORDER : Heard Mr. AJ Saikia, learned Amicus Curie and Mr. PS Lahkar, learned Addl. PP, Assam. 2. This revision petition is filed challenging the order dated 31-05-2004, whereby learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guwahati took cognizance of offence under Section 200 and 209 of the IPC and issued process against the revision petitioners. 3. One Shri Jagya Ram Mazumdar lodged a complaint before the learned Trial Court alleging that the revision petitioners were trying to dispossess the complainant from his land and also instituted various mutation proceeding before the revenue authority. It has also been alleged that the revision petitioners have filed mutation cases making false statement and submitting false document with the intention to occupy the property of the complainant. Learned Trial Court after examining the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C, took cognizance under Section 200/209 IPC and issued process. 4. Section 195(1) of the Cr.P.C reads as under: (1) No Court shall take cognizance- (a) (i) of any offence punishable under sections 172 to 188 (both inclusive) of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), or (ii) of any abetment of, or attempt to commit, such offence, or (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit such offence, except on the complaint in writing of the public servant concerned or of some other public servant to whom he is administratively subordinate; (b) (i) of any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ), namely, sections 193 to 196 (both inclusive), 199, 200, 205 to 211 (both inclusive) and 228, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in, or in relation to, any proceeding in any Court, or (ii) of any offence described in section 463, or punishable under section 471, section 475 or section 476, of the said Code, when such offence is alleged to have been committed in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court, or (iii) of any criminal conspiracy to commit, or attempt to commit, or the abetment of, any offence specified in sub-clause (i) or sub-clause (ii), except on the complaint in writing of that Court, or of some other Court to which that Court is subordinate. (2) Where a complaint has been made by a public servant under clause (a) of sub- section (1) any authority to which he is administratively subordinate may order the withdrawal of the complaint and send a copy of such order to the Court; and upon its receipt by the Court, no further proceedings shall be taken on the complaint: Provided that no such withdrawal shall be ordered if the trial in the Court of first instance has been concluded. 5. It is abundantly clear from the clause-(b)(i) of Section 195(1) that no magistrate shall take cognizance of any offence under Section 199/200/205 to 211 (both inclusive) except on a complaint in writing of a Court. 6. In the present case, there was no complaint in writing by any Court or Magistrate as contemplated in Section 195 of the Cr.P.C, whereas, the learned Magistrate took cognizance of offence under Section 200/209 on the basis of a private complaint, which is apparently beyond the jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate. Therefore, the impugned order of taking cognizance and issuing process by the learned Magistrate without jurisdiction is liable to be set-aside. 7. Accordingly, the impugned order by which the learned Trial Court took cognizance and issued process against the revision petitioners is set-aside and the proceeding under CR Case No.797c/2004 is also quashed. The revision petition is accordingly allowed. 8. Appreciating the assistance rendered by Mr. AJ Saikia, learned Amicus Curiae, I hereby provide that he will be entitled to fees, as Legal Aid Counsel as per the norms fixed by the Legal Services Authority Regulation. Upon production of a copy of this judgment, Guwahati High Court Legal Services Committee shall pay the fee to Mr. AJ Saikia. 9. The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. 10. Send back the LCR.