JUDGMENT 1. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the order of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaur dated 30.7.2004. 2. It appears in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.RC. on 16.03.2004 petitioner's statements were recorded as PW-1. She could not appear on 12.7.2004. The case was adjourned on the cost of Rs. 250/-. On 30.7.2004 the learned Magistrate closed the evidence. 3. I totally disapprove the approach adopted by the learned Magistrate. Learned Magistrate is required to adopt more sensitive approach in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.RC. 4. The petition is allowed. The order dated 12.7.2004 imposing the cost of Rs. 250/- as well as the order dated 30.7.2004 closing the evidence are set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to proceed in accordance with law.Petition allowed. *******