ORDER 14.7.2017. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Order dated 05.11.2012 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Jharsuguda in 2 (c) C.C. No.1630 of 2012 taking cognizance of the offence under Section 28 (2) of the P.C. & PNDT Act and directing issuance of summon to the petitioner-accused is challenged in this proceeding. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that Section 28 (2) of the PC & PNDT Act being not a penal provision, no cognizance of the offence can be taken thereunder and, therefore, the impugned order is an out come of non-application of mind by the learned S.D.J.M., Jharsuguda. Learned Additional Standing Counsel concedes to the above proposition. In fact, the cognizance of an offence is taken referring to the penal provision. Section 28 (2) of the PC & PNDT Act only specifies the jurisdiction of the Court which can try the offences under the Act and is not a penal provision. Hence cognizance of offence under that Section cannot be taken. Penal provision is necessary to be mentioned, so that the accused can know what charge is levelled against him and what punishment is prescribed for the offence. The CRLMC is accordingly disposed of. CRLMC disposed of.