1 S.B.Criminal Revision Petition No.363/2006 Smt.Sushma v. State of Rajasthan Date of Order :: 7th January, 2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. P.C.Solanki, for the petitioner. Mr. Vishnu Kachhwaha, Public Prosecutor. Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, for the complainant. .... By order dated 22.3.2006 learned Judicial Magistrate, Pali took cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 IPC against the petitioner alongwith other accused viz. Shri Kaushik, Bhanwarlal, Geeta and Dinesh. The contention of counsel for the petitioner is that no case under Section 406 IPC is made out against the present petitioner as there was no entrustment of property or stridhan to the petitioner as she is sister-in-law of the complainant. According to counsel for the petitioner learned Judicial Magistrate erred while taking cognizance of the offence under Section 406 IPC against the petitioner without examining the material available on record from which ti reveals that no property was ever entrusted with the petitioner. I have perused the record of the case. 2 Looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case it shall not be appropriate to interfere in the matter at this stage as a specific reference of the petitioner is given in the complaint itself, thus, the revision petition is dismissed. However, it shall be open for the petitioner to raise all the contentions before learned Judicial Magistrate at the time of framing of charge as per provisions of Section 240 Cr.P.C. ( GOVIND MATHUR ),J. Kkm/ps.