JUDGMENT 1. - This is a revision application by the complainant Ridmal Khan against an order of the learned Munsif & Judicial Magistrate, Siwana declining to take cognizance against the non-petitioner Bakhtawar Singh for offences under section 302, 307, 148 etc. of the Penal Code. The case now stands committed for trial to the Court of Sessions Judge, Balotra and is registered at No. 38/83 (State v. Maghekhan. ) 2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and the learned Public Prosecutor. 3. The case is fixed for the recording of the prosecution evidence on 14th, I 15th and 16th December, 4983. It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he will move an application before the learned Sessions Judge during [ trial to take cognizance against the non-petitioner No. 2. But before that the learned Sessions Judge be directed to record the statements of the witnesses viz., Sarvashri Sale Mohammed, Akbar Khan, Gurudayal Arya, S. D. M., Anish Chandra Pathak, I A. En., Dara Ram, Birdi Chand, Dalu Khan, and Mangi Lal, be recorded first of all. In the circumstances of the case, the request seems just and proper. 4. The learned Sessions Judge, Balotra is directed that the aforesaid eight witnesses (Sarvashri Sale Mohammed, Akbar Khan, Gurudayal Arya S.D.M., Anish Chandra Pathak, A.En., Dara Ram, Birdi Chand, Dalu Khan and Mangi Lal) be examined first of all on 13. 12. 83. Thereafter the prosecution witnesses be examined. If any of these witnesses is not available for evidence, the learned Sessions Judge will not wait for him on the aforesaid date of 13.12.83. and will proceed with the trial of the case. 5. The application is accordingly disposed of at the admission stage. 6. A copy of this order be immediately sent to the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra for compliance.Application disposed of. *******