JUDGMENT 1. The petitioners have preferred this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. claiming the following reliefs: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this criminal misc. petition may kindly be allowed and order dated 23.12.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Balotra, in complaint Case No. 1055/2017 (FIR No. 192/2016 P.S. Sindhari, Case No. 1689/2017) may kindly be quashed and set aside. Any other order which Honble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice may kindly be passed." 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor jointly submit that the controversy is covered by the judgment rendered by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Mohan Ram @ Manaram v. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2016(3) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1144 , wherein the following order had been passed:- "This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1811/2015 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Balotra, District Barmer (hereinafter referred to as the trial court) against the petitioner. In the present case, the trial court vide order dated 19.11.2015 took cognizance against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 41, 42/77 of Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1953). Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the FIR was lodged against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 41 and 42/77 of the Act of 1953 by the Head Constable Sujan Singh of the Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer on 11.10.2015. It is contended that the offence punishable under Sections 41 and 42/77 of the Act of 1953 are non- cognizable offence and as per the provisions of Sub- Section (2) of Section 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, no police officer shall investigate into non- cognizable case without order of Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. It is argued that the FIR in the present case, could not have been registered because there was no order from the Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. It is argued that the FIR in the present case, could not have been registered because there was no order from the Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. It is further argued that the trial court, without taking into consideration the above position of law, has illegally proceeded against the petitioner and has taken cognizance against him for the offences punishable under Sections 41, 42/77 of the Act of 1953 vide order dated 19.11.2015. In support of above contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court in the case of Pintu Dey v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. decided on 9.4.2015 and Pappu Ram v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2015 (1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 304. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the criminal misc. petition and has argued that as per the provisions of Section 64 of the Act of 1953, any Police Officer has power to arrest any person without warrant against whom a reasonable suspicion exists of his having been involved in any forest offence punishable with imprisonment for one month or upwords and, therefore, the police officer is also competent to register and investigate any FIR against any person in which the complaint is made for commission of offences under Sections 41 and 42 of the Act of 1953. However, learned Public Prosecutor has fairly conceded that the punishment provided under Sections 42 and 77 of the Act of 1953 are less than 3 years, therefore, the offences punishable under Sections 42 and 77 of the Act of 1953 are non-cognizable offences. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order. Sub-section (2) of section 155 of CrPC reads as under: "(2) No police officer shall investigate a noncognizable case without the order of a Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial." Part-II of Schedule-I of CrPC reads as under: "II - CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCES AGAINST OTHER LAWS Offence Cognizable or Non- Bailable or Non- By what Court Cognizable Bailable triable If punishment with Cognizable Non-bailable Court of Session death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years, If punishable with Cognizable Non-bailable Magistrate of the first imprisonment for 3 class years and upwards but not more than 7 years. If punishable with Non-cognizable Bailable Any Magistrate imprisonment for less than 3 years or with fine only. As held by the Andhra Pradesh High Court The punishment provided in Sections 42 and 77 of the Act of 1953 is upto 6 months or fine or both and one month or fine or both respectively and, therefore, as per Part II of Schedule-I of Cr.P.C, the said offences are noncognizable offences and as per Sub-Section (2) of Section 155 Cr.P.C., no Police Officer shall investigate a non-cognizable case without an order of Magistrate. Admittedly, the FIR No. 152/2015 was lodged at Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer against the petitioner without there being any order of Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial. In view of above discussions, the action of registration of impugned FIR against the petitioner without there being any order of Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial, is violative of Sub Section (2) of Section 55 of Cr.P.C. and the consequent order of the trial court taking cognizance against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 41 and 42/77 of the Act of 1953 is also bad in the eye of law. Resultantly this criminal misc. petition is allowed. The order of taking cognizance by the learned Judicial Magistrate by order dated 19.11.2015 in Criminal Case No. 1811/2015 is quashed. The impugned FIR No. 152/2015 of Police Station Sindhari, District Barmer is also quashed. The stay petition also stands dismissed." 3. In light of the aforequoted precedent law, the present misc. petition is allowed in the same terms and the order dated 23.12.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Balotra in Complaint Case No. 1055/2017 (FIR No. 192/2016 Police Station Sindhari) and Case No. 1689/2017 is hereby quashed and set aside.