BHARAT JEE Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Ajit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Anant Kumar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Amrendra Kumar Pathak, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of complainant/opposite party no. 2.

(2.) Five petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 25-05-2010 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Buxar (hereinafter referred to as "Magistrate") in Complaint Case No. 801 (C) of 2009/1375 Tr. 11. By the said order, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 323 & 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(3.) Sri Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners firstly has assailed the order of cognizance on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the complaint petition, there is nothing to show as to whether any occurrence had taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of Buxar court and as such, order of cognizance is liable to be set aside. He further submits that the present complaint was filed maliciously on the ground that prior to filing of the present complaint petition, the husband of complainant, who is petitioner no. 1, had filed a matrimonial case i.e. Matrimonial Case No. 55 of 2009 in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Buxar under Section 9 read with section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Of course, the date of filing of the matrimonial case is not mentioned in the petition, but orally it was submitted by Sri Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners that said case was filed on 17-04-2009. On aforesaid ground, he has prayed for setting aside order of cognizance.