PRADEEP Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Y.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned AGA for the State and Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant.

(2.) In Crime No: 715A of 2006, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC, P.S. Kotwali City, District- Etah, final report was submitted by the police. Protest petition was filed by the complainant, which was treated as complaint. The complainant was examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and two witnesses Sukvendra and Amit were examined u/s 202 Cr.P.C. Learned C.J.M., Etah vide order dated 10.3.2007, summoned the petitioners to face trial under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 IPC. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners preferred criminal revision No. 46 of 2010, which was dismissed by A.S.J., Court No. 7, Etah vide judgment and order dated 19.10.2010. Both the aforesaid orders are under challenge in this writ petition.

(3.) Only ground for challenge in this writ petition is that learned Magistrate has not examined all the prosecution witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. as provided by Proviso to Section 202(2) Cr.P.C.