JUDGMENT 1. - The present misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the proceedings going on against him in the court of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana in Criminal Case No.120/2008 and being aggrieved by the order dated 17.01.2009 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana framing the charges against the petitioner for offence under Section 498A IPC as affirmed in revision by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Parbatsar by his order dated 25.07.2009 in Criminal Revision No.18/2009. 2. Assailing the proceedings going on against the petitioner, the principal ground of challenge which has been canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that none of the causes of action for trying the petitioner for offence under Section 498A IPC has arisen in the territorial jurisdiction of the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana because as per the highest allegation of the complainant in her complaint as well as in the statement recorded under Section 161 Criminal Procedure Code all the alleged acts of cruelty have been stated to have been committed at her matrimonial home, which is at Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. Thus, while placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhura Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., 2008 (65) AIC 122 (SC)=2008 (61) ACC 668= 2008 (11) SCC 103 . learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana are impermissible because the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana lacks jurisdiction to try the case. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made and submits that now the charge-sheet has been filed in the matter and the charges have also been framed against the accused, thus, the trial of the case is very much permissible in the court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the orders impugned passed by the learned courts below and have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar. 5. A perusal of the complaint filed by the complainant and the statement of the complainant and the other witnesses recorded under Section 161 Criminal Procedure Code reveal that all the acts of cruelty which the complainant has alleged upon were committed at her matrimonial home, which is at Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. 5. A perusal of the complaint filed by the complainant and the statement of the complainant and the other witnesses recorded under Section 161 Criminal Procedure Code reveal that all the acts of cruelty which the complainant has alleged upon were committed at her matrimonial home, which is at Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. There is no allegation of the complainant that she was ever harassed or humiliated by the accused or that any act of cruelty as defined under Section 498A IPC was committed on her by the accused persons at Makrana. Resultantly, this court is of the opinion tested in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Bhura Ram (supra), the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makarana does not have jurisdiction to try the case. The case at best can be tried by the court having jurisdiction for trying the offences committed in the area of Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. 6. Accordingly, this misc. petition succeeds. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana is directed to send the file of Criminal Case No.120/2008 to the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Metropolitan, Jaipur, who shall thereafter transfer the case for trial to the appropriate court. 7. The accused shall appear before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Metropolitan, Jaipur on 12.03.2012 and thereafter on all subsequent dates of hearing till the conclusion of the trial. 8. The misc. petition as well as stay petition stand disposed of accordingly.Petition Disposed *******