10 Crl.P. No. 225 of 2023 section 196 of the Code that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under the above-referred sections of the PPC. Neither an FIR can be registered nor can a permission from the Secretary justify the act of the Magistrate. As contemplated in section 196 of the Code, no Court shall take cognizance of the offences of the PPC, mentioned therein, unless upon a complaint filed by the authorities concerned, therefore, the Trial Court had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of sections 121-A, 124, 153-A and 505 of the PPC, on the basis of the FIR, hence, the judicial proceedings initiated by it to the extent of such offences are coram non judice. However, rest of the offences incorporated in the FIR, which are outside the purview of section 196 of the Code, are cognizable by the Court. 9. Without prejudice to the above, admittedly, the petitioner was not nominated in the FIR. During the investigation, the I.O reached a conclusion that the petitioner is a conspirator along with the main accused, therefore, subsequently through a supplementary statement he was involved in this case. The main evidence against the petitioner is the transcript allegedly recovered on the pointation of the main accused from his house, when he was in custody. The petitioner has specifically denied the existence and authenticity of the transcript, therefore, its evidentiary value to the extent of the petitioner is not free from doubt. Besides, if the alleged views orally expressed by the main accused during the live telecast are believed to be true and in violation of any reasonable restriction imposed by law, a question arises as to how the petitioner, can be held responsible for the act of the main accused, merely on the ground that he being a member of the administration of the broadcaster, is equally responsible. It is a settled principle of law that each person is responsible for his deeds and actions, hence, holding the petitioner responsible for the act of the main accused, without prima facie cogent evidence, is unjustified. Consequently, in the absence of a complaint by a competent authority to the extent of the offences of PPC, mentioned in section 196 of the Code and because of lack of the