JUDGMENT H.C.P. Tripathi, J. - This revision is directed against an order of a Magistrate First Class, Azamgarh, rejecting the applicants' application for summoning a number of persons as defence witnesses. 2. The facts of the case lie in a short compass. 3. On October 5, 1965 one Suresh lodged a report at police station Dohrighat that his brother had been murdered by Babu Ram, Bhagelu Rai, Jharkande and Dahari on the investigation of Rama Nand Rai. On the basis of this report a case was registered by the police who investigated it and submitted a charge sheet against Bhagelu, Jharkande and Dahari. During the course of enquiry it was alleged by the witnesses that the present applicants were also associated with the crime. Accordingly the Magistrate committed Bhagelu, Jharkande and Dahari to the court of Sessions on June 28, 1966 to stand their trial under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and also passed an order summoning the present applicants. When the applicants appeared before the Magistrate they applied for leading evidence in defence as according to them cognizance of the case against them was taken by the Magistrate under Section 190 (1) (c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This application was rejected. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the applicants. 5. In my opinion the impugned order of the Magistrate is legally correct and therefore, cannot be interfered with because the cognizance of the offence was taken by the Magistrate under Section 190(1) (b) upon a report in writing of such facts by any police official and not under sub-clause (c) of the aforesaid section. That being so, the procedure prescribed under Section 207 (a) of the Code applied and the applicants had no right to examine defence before the enquiry court although they could have asked the Magistrate to summon them to appear before the trial court in case a charge has been framed against them. 6. Further, cognizance is taken of the offence and not of the offender. So when the police does not file a charge-sheet against all the persons alleged to have committed the offence the Magistrate has power to summon persons not mentioned in the said report and he will be deemed to have taken cognizance under Section 190(1) (b) of the Code even against those who have been subsequently summoned (1962, Calcutta, 133). 7. So when the police does not file a charge-sheet against all the persons alleged to have committed the offence the Magistrate has power to summon persons not mentioned in the said report and he will be deemed to have taken cognizance under Section 190(1) (b) of the Code even against those who have been subsequently summoned (1962, Calcutta, 133). 7. There is no force in this revision and it is dismissed. The stay order is discharged. Let the record of this case be sent back to the court below.