Judgment : No one appears in support of the revisional application, when the matter is called on. The impugned criminal proceeding was registered against the coaccused person for having induced the complainant to pay money for securing employment. It has been averred that the petitioner was not named in the first information report. It has further been pleaded that the charge-sheet does not disclose the role played by the petitioner in the alleged crime. I am of the view that the allegations in the impugned charge-sheet, prima facie, disclose complicity of the petitioner with the principal accused in the commission of offence. Accordingly, the learned Magistrate did not commit any jurisdictional error taking cognizance of the alleged offence on the impugned charge-sheet. An analysis of the prosecution case qua the involvement of the petitioner can only be done at a more mature stage of the proceeding. I, therefore, dispose of the revisional application by giving liberty to the petitioner to agitate the issues raised in the petition at the stage of framing of charge and in the event, an application for discharge is preferred, the learned Magistrate shall consider the same in accordance with law. The revisional application is disposed of.