Judgment V.M.Jain, J. 1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the complainant, in a state case U/s 325, 323, 34 IPC. 2. One Dhani Ram was one of the prosecution witnesses, as per the list of witnesses, copy Annexure P1. On 2.5.1997, when the cross-examination of one witness was completed, it was found by the Court that Dhani Ram, who was present in Court, had remained sitting in the Court throughout the cross- examination of PW-1. Hence, the evidence of Dhani Ram was dispensed with by the learned Magistrate vide order dated 2.5.1997 on the ground that he remained sitting without informing the Court. Thereafter, the case was adjourned for recording evidence of remaining prosecution witnesses. 3. In the present petition, the prayer made by the complainant-petitioner is that necessary directions may be given to the learned Trial Magistrate, to examine Dhani Ram as prosecution witness in this case. 4. After hearing both the sides and perusing the record. In my opinion, the evidence of Dhani Ram prosecution witness, could not be dispensed with for all times to come. The learned Magistrate was justified in not recording the statement of Dhani Ram on 2.5.1997 on the ground that he remained present in the Court room at the time when cross-examination of PW-1 was being recorded. However, this would not mean that for all times to come, the statement of Dhani Ram was not to be recorded by the Court in this case, especially when there is nothing on the record to show that the prosecution had given up Dhani Ram as a prosecution witness or that the prosecution did not want to examine Dhani Ram as a prosecution witness. 5. For the reasons recorded above, the present petition is allowed and the trial Magistrate is directed to examine Dhani Ram as a prosecution witness, subject to the decision of the prosecution to examine or not to examine Dhani Ram as a prosecution witness in this case.