JAINENDRA KUMAR SINGH @ RAJA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE first information report lodged under Sections 498 A, 406 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, is being sought to be quashed on the ground that it is hit by Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, none of the cause of action ever accrued at Dhanbad, where the complaint was lodged, which was sent before the concerned police station under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. In this regard, it was submitted that whatever overt act, constituting offence u/s 498 A of the Indian Penal Code have been alleged to have been committed, those have been committed at Orissa.

(2.) IT was further pointed out that so far as allegation with respect to Dowry Prohibition Act is concerned, it is not clear as to where demand was made and so far as this petitioner is concerned, neither he has been alleged to have done any overt act so as to constitute any offence under Sections

(3.) SO far as the matter relating to jurisdiction is concerned, it has come that when the demand of dowry was made, amount was deposited in Bank of India at Amlaghat Branch, which situates within the jurisdiction of Dhanbad, where the case has been lodged.