1. The sole petitioner seeks for quashment of C.C.No.254 of 2014 on the file of the II Additional Junior Civil Judge cum XIX Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Kukatpally. The petitioner alleged that the 2nd respondent, who is the de facto complainant, laid the complaint, which was taken on file as C.C.No.254 of 2014 without recording the sworn statement of the 2nd respondent. Sri T.Niranjan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the learned Magistrate took the sworn affidavit of the 2nd respondent, treated the same as sworn statement of the 2nd respondent and took the case on file. He submitted that non-recording the sworn statement of the 2nd respondent vitiates the trial.

2. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner referred to Section 200 Cr.P.C and the proviso thereto. The same is quoted for convenience.

“200. Examination of complainant:--A Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence on complaint shall examine upon oath the complainant and the witnesses present, if any, and the substance of such examination shall be reduced to writing and shall be signed by the complainant and the witnesses, and also by the Magistrate.

Provided that, when