MOHAN LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition undersection 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') seeks to quash the proceedings and also the order dated 23.6.1995 passed by die learned M.M., Delhi and order dated 27.8.96 passed by the learned A.S.J. in revision on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.

(2.) Briefly facts giving rise to the present petition are that one Smt. Poonam Sharma had lodged a complaint dated 30.7.1992 with the Crime Against Women Cell, New Delhi (for short CAW). On the said complaint being forwarded by the latter FIR No. 480/92 under Section 406, Indian Penal Code was registered at P.S. Vikas Puri, New Delhi. After completing investigation, charge-sheet under Section 173, Criminal Procedure Code was submitted against all the petitioners for offences under Sections 498-A and 406, IPC. The learned M.M. took cognizance and summoned the petitioners-accused. Petitioner Nos. 1 to 6 respectively are die husband, the mother-in-law, brother-in-law (Jeth), father-in-law, sister-in-law (Jethani) and the brother-in-law (Dewar) of the complainant. After hearing the parties learned M.M. vide order dated 23.6.1995 held that the charges undersections 498-A and 406, Indian Penal Code were made out against the petitioners. In revision under Section 397, Cr.P.C. against that order the learned A.S.J. partly allowed die revision petition vide his order dated 27.8.1996, holding that offence under Section 406, Indian Penal Code was not made out butoffenceunderSections498-A/34,IPConly was made out against all the petitioners. One of the objections taken before die learned A.S.J. was that die Courts at Delhi had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain and try the offences alleged. This objection has been overruled by die learned A.S.J. The petitioner-husband had also filed petition for divorce before the Court of District Judge ,Dharamshala.That petition was allowe dand a decree of dissolution of marriage was passed on 4.8.1994.That decree has been upheld in appeal by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh on 25.4.1995.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has raised the following contentions.