Bharat Singh Vs. State Of M.P.

The Ratio of This Judgement Has Been OverRuled By SupremeCourt Rupali Devi Vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.

Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Bench: JUSTICE Indrani Datta
Bharat Singh Vs. State Of M.P. on 29 September 2010

Law Point:
Cruelty, dowry demand — Limitation — Computation of period —
Territorial jurisdiction — Allegations with respect to cruelty and torture committed at matrimonial home at Karera — JMFC rightly directed to file charge-sheet within territorial jurisdiction of Court where alleged act of cruelty happened.
JUDGEMENT

1. Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing FIR concerning Crime No. 196/2010 registered at P.S. Karera, District Shivpuri against the petitioners under Section 498A, IPC and Section 314 of Dowry Prohibition Act so also for quashing proceedings of Criminal Case No. 528/2010 pending in the Court of JMFC, Karera, District Shivpuri.

2. Facts in a nutshell are that written complaint was made by one Shashi Devi, wife of petitioner No. 2 Ajay to Police Station Digoda, District Tikamgarh. As per that complaint, the complainant was married with petitioner No. 2 in the year 2004 and after marriage petitioners started harassing and torturing her with respect to demand of dowry. On the day of Raksha Bandhan complainant was kicked out from matrimonial house with a demand of Motorcycle. On that report Police Station Digoda has registered FIR No. 90/06 under Sections 498A/34, IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. The matter was investigated and challan was submitted before the JMFC, Tikamgarh as per Annexure-A3. In that case prosecution produced evidence and statements were recorded before the JMFC, Tikamgarh and date was fixed for final hearing on 10.5.2010. On that date the petitioners raised objection with respect to territorial jurisdiction of the Court. That application was allowed as per BHARAT SINGH v. STATE OF M.P. 42 (Sep.) 2011 DIVORCE & MATRIMONIAL CASES a b c d e f g h Annexure: A4 and the learned Court of JMFC, Tikamgarh directed Police Station Digodha to file charge-sheet in competent Court. Thereafter challan has been referred to Police Station Karera and Police Station, Karera on 2.6.2010 registered an FIR. Thereafter charge-sheet was filed in the Court of JMFC, Karera. Copy of the FIR and Final Report are Annexures A5 and A6. The learned JMFC, Karera without considering the matter rejected the objection filed by the petitioners as per Annexure-P7 that the charge-sheet is barred by limitation under Section 468, Cr.P.C., giving rise to this petition.

3. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioners that as per the provisions of Section 468, Cr.P.C. incident is dated 1.6.2006 and charge-sheet is submitted on 30.6.2010. Hence the charge-sheet is barred by limitation as contemplated under Section 468, Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that Police Station Karera did not investigate the matter and charge-sheet was filed, which is contrary to provisions. Hence all the proceedings concerning Crime No. 1961/2010 deserve to be quashed.

4. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the petition and prayed for its rejection.

5. It is alleged that the petitioners made demand of dowry at Karera, District Shivpuri and allegations with respect to cruelty and torture were also committed at matrimonial home at Karera, therefore, case falls within the territorial jurisdiction of Karera, District Shivpuri where alleged offence was committed. Hence, the learned JMFC, Tikamgarh by order dated 10.5.2010 has rightly directed to file charge-sheet within territorial jurisdiction of the Court where alleged act of cruelty happened. The Hon’ble Apex Court in Y. Abrahim Ajith and Others v. Inspector of Police Chennai and Others, II (2004) DMC 371 (SC)=V (2004) SLT 152=II (2004) CCR 130 (SC)=AIR 2004 SC 4286, has held that ordinary venue for trial of a crime is the area of jurisdiction in which, on evidence, facts occur and which alleged to constitute the crime. Continuing offence as still distinguishable to one which is committed once for all.

6. As the charge-sheet has been filed before the concerned Court of Tikamgarh within limitation and the by order dated 10.5.2010 of that Court as then alleged offence is committed at Karera charge-sheet was filed on 21.7.2010 before JMFC Karera., In computing the period of limitation, time during which petitioners have been prosecuted in Court of Tikamgarh is to be excluded under Section 470, Cr.P.C. during which charge-sheet was filed before the JMFC, Tikamgarh.

7. Considering the facts of the case, I find no reason to quash the FIR as well as criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 528/2010 pending before the JMFC, Karera, District Shivpuri. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.
Petition dismissed.

DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.

You may contact me for  consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us