OM PRAKASH SINGH TANWAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dated 7.8.2010, passed by the Additional District & Session Judge (Fast Track) No.4, Jaipur City, Jaipur, whereby he has quashed and set aside the order dated 16.05.2009, passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division) and Judicial magistrate, First Class No.8, Jaipur City, Jaipur, the petitioner has approached this Court.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the complainant-respondent No.2 against the petitioner for offences under Section 199, 430, 493, 494, 495 and 496 IPC. The statement of the complainant and her witnesses were recorded. After hearing the complainant, vide order dated 16.05.2009, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint. Against the order dated 16.05.2009, the respondent No.2 filed a revision petition before the learned Judge. However, vide order dated 7.8.2010, the learned Judge allowed the revision petition. Hence, this petition before this Court.

(3.) Mr. Amrit Prasad Sharma, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently contended that as offences had occurred in Jodhpur, the courts in Jaipur do not have the territorial jurisdiction to try the same. Therefore, the learned Judge was not justified in quashing and setting aside the order dated 16.05.2009 passed by the Magistrate.