Short Note : 1. The revision was directed against an order passed by the Sessions Judge whereby he refused to examine some witnesses for the complainant. Held : The proviso to sub-section (2) of section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is that "if it appears to the Magistrate that the offence complained of is triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions, he shall call upon the complainant to produce all his witnesses and examine them on oath." Admittedly, the three witnesses, though named in the list of witnesses were not examined by the Magistrate. It was not suggested on behalf of the non-applicant that there was any failure or default on the part of the complainant so far as the non-compliance of this proviso to sub-section (2) of section 202 of the Code is conceded. The impugned order of the Sessions Judge does not also say so. The purpose behind this proviso is not far to seek. The non-examination of the witnesses for the complainant before the committing Magistrate in a case in which the offence is treable exclusively by the Court of Sessions deprives the accused of a legitimate opportunity of cross-examining the witnesses before the committing Court. It could not be disputed that a commitment without complying with this proviso to sub-section (2) of section 202 of the Code will be illegal. Revision allowed.