ORDER : 1. This appeal arises from the Judgment and Order passed by the High Court of Delhi (Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) dated 6-5-2013 in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.1815/2013, by which the High Court rejected the petition filed by the appellant - herein thereby affirming the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, rejecting the Criminal Revision Petition filed by the appellant against the order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate taking cognizance of the complaint lodged by the Respondent No.1 -herein for the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) respectively. 2. The complaint lodged by the Respondent No.1 reads thus:- 1. That Complainant is working as Deputy Commissioner(Crops), under the Administrative Control of Horticulture Commissioner, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Krishi Bhawan-New Delhi. The Complainant is General Secretary, Technical Officers' Association, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi. 2. That the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi imposed cost of Rs.5000 /- on accused No.2 i.e. secretary (A & C) vide Order dated 23.4.2008 passed in WP(C) 5549/2007 for non compliance of the Order of the Hon'ble High Court. On 16th May, 2008, Shri P.K.Basu (Accused No. l), called the Complainant in his Chamber in Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi and tried to physical assault the Complainant and threatened dire consequences in presence of one of his supporter shri Amit Jha, Director. In the meantime one Shri S.K. Jain, Deputy Secretary entered and intervened then only accused No.1 leave the Complainant threatening for dire consequences. 3. That the complainant being General Secretary, Technical Officers Association, Ministry of Agriculture, wrote a letter to Prime Minister on 27.6.2008, for grievances of Technical Officers which were not be liking of Shri Basu, who is In-charge Administration. 4. That Complainant was sick since 2nd July, 2008 and was on leave since 2nd July, on medical ground. On request of the complainant, the Competent authority granted leave to the complainant upto 8th July, 2008. 5. That Shri P.K. Basu, (Accused No.1) Additional Secretary sent a person namely Shri.Amit, (Accused No. -3) Administrative Assistant, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation with a letter at the residence of Complainant at about 4 PM on 3.7.2008. Accused No.3 stated that the Complainant has been relieved from duties and he had to join duty immediately on another organization - namely National Rain fed Area Authority. Accused No.3 stated that the Complainant has been relieved from duties and he had to join duty immediately on another organization - namely National Rain fed Area Authority. The Complainant told accused No.3 and shown the letter of competent authority that he is on leave from 2nd to 8th July as he is not feeling well. On this, accused No.3 annoyed and forced the complainant to come with him in the office. Accused No.3 also threatened the complainant that if he will not come with him then he has to suffer with dire consequences as accused No.1 wants to see him in office immediately. Accused No. 3 also used force and assaulted the complainant. Complainant tried to make the accused No.3 understand but accused No.3, Shri Amit forcefully tried to take the Complainant with him and assaulted him at the residence of Complainant. 6. That on the same day on dated 3.7.2008 at about 6-30 PM, Accused No.1 sent a local goon who was having deadly weapons like knife and hockey stick, at the residence of Complainant who tried to take away the Complainant from his residence forcefully and physically assaulted, on being resisted, the Goon has given threatening to kill the Complainant and said that Complainant will be eliminated on 4.7.2007 if he failed to go to the Chamber of Accused No.1 and will not join duty on4.7.2008. Thereafter, The Complainant went to PS - R.K. Puram, Sector - 12 and lodged a Complaint for the said incident on the same day .i.e. 3.7.2008 at about 7-45 PM. The Police lodged the complaint in Daily diary vide no.40A/3.7.2008 but police has not taken any action against the accused persons till date. 7. That on very next day the complainant has seen the local goons sent by accused persons who were moving near the house of the complainant with deadly weapons like hockey stick, knife etc. The complainant is afraid of the act of the accused persons. In fear, the Complainant immediately left his house and get shelter in the house of his relative to save himself and his family. 8. That the complainant is very afraid of from the accused Nos. 1 to 4 and he is having apprehension that if immediately appropriate action will not be taken against the accused persons then they will cause any mishappening with the complainant and his family." 3. 8. That the complainant is very afraid of from the accused Nos. 1 to 4 and he is having apprehension that if immediately appropriate action will not be taken against the accused persons then they will cause any mishappening with the complainant and his family." 3. It appears that the Magistrate took cognizance of the aforesaid complaint and issued process for the offence punishable under Sections 323 and 352 of IPC respectively. 4. The order of process passed by the Magistrate was challenged by the appellant in the Sessions Court by filing Criminal Revision Application. The same was not entertained and came to be rejected. 5. The matter travelled upto the High Court. The High Court also declined to entertain and rejected the application filed by the appellant - herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 6. It is the case of the complainant that at the relevant point of time, he was serving as Deputy Commissioner(Crops) under the administrative control of Horticulture Commissioner, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. He was also a Joint Secretary, Technical Officers Association, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi. 7. We take notice of the fact that in all 4 persons were named as accused in the complaint. Cognizance was taken only against the appellant - herein and so far as the remaining three co-accused are concerned, the Magistrate dismissed the complaint. 8. Upon perusal of the complaint, it appears that the appellant-herein at the relevant point of time was serving as Administrative Assistant, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation. 9. On the date of the incident, as alleged there was some altercation between the complainant and the appellant - herein. 10. The allegations are that the appellant - herein threatened the complainant with dire consequences. That later in point of time, the appellant - herein is alleged to have sent local goons at the residence of the appellant - herein with deadly weapons like knife, hockey sticks. 11. The aforesaid is the sum and substance of the allegations levelled in the complaint. 12. We heard Ms. Anupriya Srivastava, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Sankalp Goswami, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 - original complainant. 13. We have no hesitation in saying that the plain reading of the complaint fails to disclose commission of any cognizable offence. 12. We heard Ms. Anupriya Srivastava, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Sankalp Goswami, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 - original complainant. 13. We have no hesitation in saying that the plain reading of the complaint fails to disclose commission of any cognizable offence. None of the ingredients to constitute the offence punishable under Section 323 or Section 352 of IPC are disclosed. 14. We can go to the extent of saying that it appears to be nothing but some personal outburst or grudge on the part of the complainant against the appellant - herein. 15. In view of the aforesaid, this appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed. 16. The impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside so also the order passed by the Magistrate taking cognizance and issuing process. 17. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.