Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19528 Court No. - 29 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2925 of 2025 Applicant :- Chhote Lal And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Pandey,Satyendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./ 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed on behalf of the applicants with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 03.03.2025 as well as entire Criminal Case No.2397 of 2023 (earlier Complaint Case No.553 of 2011), Surmila Vs. Pradeep Kumar and stay the further proceeding of Criminal Case No.2397 of 2023, in the interest of justice. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was filed by opposite party no.2, namely, Surmila wife of Parikarma and later on after recording the statement of the complainant as well as the witnesses under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. respectively, the Magistrate treated the application as complaint case and thereafter, the list of witnesses was also submitted by the opposite party no.2 whereas the fact remains that the Jay Ram was shown in the list of witnesses at serial no.4 whereas he has been observed as PW-2 in the trial court proceeding which is impermissible under the law. He next submits that there is no application regarding his appearance before the trial court; with the request that his testimony would be deposed as PW-2 and, therefore, the whole of the proceedings of the complaint vitiates in the eyes of law and the same is liable to the quashed. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that there is no such law where list of witnesses are produced and some witnesses are on the other place or serial number; could not be treated as on the next number as PW-1, 2 etc. Thus submission is that there is no merit in the case. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it transpires that the main contention of learned counsel for the applicants is that one of the witness, namely, Jay Ram, who is at serial no.4 in the list of witnesses deposed as PW-2, which is impermissible under the law though the learned counsel for the applicants have failed to demonstrate any law in support of his contention and in fact there is no law as such. Thus, this Court finds no merit in this case, consequently, the present application is hereby dismissed. Consigned to record. Order Date :- 7.4.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench