S JOSEPH DENNIS SAHAYAM Vs. M MARIYA GRACY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C to quash the case in C.C.No.255 of 2016 on the file of the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners 1 & 2 are the accused Nos.1 & 2 in C.C.No.255 of 2016 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel. According to him, the marriage between the first petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 23.05.2008. They begot one female child on 21.04.2009. The respondent gave a complaint against the first petitioner and his mother before the Puliyangudi Police and a case has been registered on 10.08.2014 in Cr.No.384 of 2014 under Sections 498(A), 294(b), 323 and 109 I.P.C. Subsequently, the respondent has filed a private complaint before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, alleging that on three dates, viz., on 15.06.2014, 31.07.2014 and 06.08.2014, offences have been committed by the petitioners herein. He further submitted that as per the complaint, all the aforesaid occurrences took place only in the residence of the first petitioner, which comes under the jurisdiction of Puliyangudi Police Station and the said police station falls within the jurisdiction of Judicial Magistrate, Sivagiri and as such, the learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel is not having jurisdiction to entertain the aforesaid private complaint and therefore, he prayed to quash the case in C.C.No.255 of 2016 on the file of the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the respondent has submitted that the marriage between the first petitioner and the respondent was solemnized within the jurisdiction of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel and at the time of marriage, a sum of Rs.3 lakhs was given by the respondent's father and that the first petitioner has received the said amount by saying that he will purchase a property in the name of the respondent, but, in stead of purchasing the property in the name of the respondent, he purchased the property in his name and thereby cheated the respondent and her father. He further submitted that since the said transaction took place at the time of marriage and the said marriage was solemnized within the jurisdiction of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel is having jurisdiction to entertain the above complaint.