APARNA KUNJAMMA Vs. ANIL SASIDHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate, to entertain and proceed with a complaint in respect of the offences under Ss. 3, 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, at the place where the victim of the offence had taken shelter and temporarily resides, is the matter to be decided in this original petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by the de facto complainant in such a case.

(2.) The petitioner herein is the estranged wife of the first respondent. Respondents 2 and 3 are the father and mother of the first respondent. Alleging that the respondents demanded and received dowry in the form of gold ornaments, at the family house of the respondents at Thiruvalla, in connection with the marriage of the petitioner with the first respondent, which was solemnised on 1/4/2012, the petitioner preferred complaint against the respondents before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Mavelikkara. The reason for preferring the complaint before the Court at Mavelikkara was that, it is at that place, that the petitioner used to reside with a relative, while she came down to Kerala from her place of employment at Bangalore. The learned Magistrate initially proceeded with the complaint by recording the sworn statement of the petitioner. In the meanwhile, the respondents challenged the maintainability of the above complaint on the ground of territorial jurisdiction and limitation by filing Crl.M.C No.9450/2024 before this Court. As per the order dtd. 14/1/2025, the above Crl.M.C was disposed of, permitting the respondents herein to raise the above challenges in respect of jurisdiction and limitation before the learned Magistrate, and directing the learned Magistrate to decide the same, after affording an opportunity to both parties to advance their arguments. Accordingly, the matter was heard by the learned Magistrate, and it was found that he has no territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences alleged in that complaint. Thus, by Ext.P1 order dtd. 15/4/2025, the learned Magistrate returned the complaint under Sec. 224(a) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to present the same before the proper court. It is the aforesaid order, which is under challenge in this petition.

(3.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3, and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.