VIPIN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Vipin Kumar is husband of respondent No. 2, Neelam Rani. Petitioner Raj Rani and Kamal Kumar (Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3) are relations of Vipin Kumar. Marriage of petitioner No. 1 with respondent No. 2 was solemnized on 22.2.1992 according to Hindu rites. It is alleged that at the time of marriage, father of respondent No. 2 had given adequate dowry including ornaments made of gold, furniture, refrigerator etc. After her marriage she lived well in the house of the petitioner at Ambala, for a period of 15-20 days. Thereafter, the petitioner and others started harassing respondent No. 2 on the count that her father has given her less dowry. She was told that if she did not bring scooter from her father, she will lose her life. Respondent No. 2 came to Rohtak and told all facts to her father and brother. Rs. 10000/- were paid to meet the demand. Petitioner No. 1 came to Rohtak to take her to Ambala. After some time she was given threats and harassed besides being assaulted. Respondent No. 2 became sick. Petitioners left her at Rohtak. She made the complaint which is the basis of F.I.R. lodged at Rohtak.

(2.) THE learned Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak on 20th May, 1993 discharged the other accused persons besides the petitioners. It was recorded that prima facie case under Section 498-A is made out and that the Court at Rohtak had the jurisdiction to try the same.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently urged that the court at Rohtak, had no jurisdiction to try the case because in his opinion, harassment, if any, with respect to Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, took place at Ambala and that filing of the complaint at Rohtak is an abuse of process of the Court, when there is no controversy that ordinarily every offence is to be tried by the court in whose local jurisdiction it was committed.