PAWAN KUMAR PANDEY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashment of their entire criminal proceedings in connection with Dhanbad (Saraidhela) P.S. Case No. 07 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. No. 51 of 2004 arising out of C.P. Case No. 1582 of 2003 for the alleged offence under Sections 420/406/384/120B/306/511 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) The complainant-opposite party No. 2 herein had presented a complaint before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Dhanbad that he had negotiated the marriage of his daughter with the Petitioner No. 2 Vishal Chandra Pandey and during such negotiation the accused persons had raised demand of Rs. 4 lakhs in cash, gold ornaments weighing 20 bhars, freeze, colour T.V. and other household articles to which the complainant-opposite party No. 2 expressed his inability. However, demand was modified by the accused persons who proposed before the complainant to pay Rs. 2 lakhs to them by way of demand draft and the balance amount in cash with the condition that engagement shall be held at Lucknow. Ring ceremony/engagement was held on 10.8.2003. On the eve of which, valuable gifts were presented to them and as per demand the complainant paid Rs. 2 lakhs in cash but the accused persons insisted for payment of the balance amount. The complainant-opposite party No. 2 arranged another demand draft of balance amount on 22.9.2003. A "Chheka" was also organized at Lucknow on 5.10.2003 but subsequently the accused persons started avoiding in fixation of the date of marriage and for that they demanded an Indica Car and Rs. 2 lakhs in cash. When the complainant-opposite party No. 2 expressed his inability to meet out, he was humiliated and ultimately they refused marriage of the refusal his daughter went into depression and she expressed her desire that she did not want to survive more to which the complainant-O.P. No. 2 apprehended that his daughter may commit suicide. On such apprehension he filed a complaint case which was sent to the police under the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 156(3) Code of Criminal Procedure for institution of the FIR and for investigating the case.

(3.) Preliminary defence of the Petitioners was that the entire occurrence as alleged took place within the territorial jurisdiction of Lucknow right from the engagement of the boy and girl up to ring ceremony and "Chheka" and that the marriage was also broken at Lucknow itself, as such, no part of alleged occurrence took place within the territorial jurisdiction of the CJM of Dhanbad, therefore, complainant filed before the CJM and cognizance taken thereon was barred by territorial jurisdiction.