P.N. Bakshi, J.

1. THIS application in revision arises out of an order passed by the Magistrate summoning the accused. It appears that a complaint was filed against the applicant for an offence under section 379 IPC. The statement of the complainant and his witnesses was recorded. Thereafter, the impugned order has been passed by the Magistrate summoning the applicant. Hence this revision.

2. THE sole point which has been argued in this revision is that the oath which was given to the witnesses in the examination under section 200 Cr. P.C. was given by Khayali Ram orderly (Chaprasi), and therefore, these statements are not admissible in evidence. It is hence argued that there is no material before the trial court for summoning the applicant. 'On the other hand, the Government Advocate Sri Girdhar Malviya has submitted that even if the oath was administered to the witnesses by the Chaprasi of the court, at the worst it would be an irregularity curable under section 7 of the baths Act and will not vitiate the proceedings.

I have carefully considered the submissions which have been made by the counsel for the parties. Section 4 of the Oaths Act refers to oath or affirmation to