Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Brijesh Chouhan & Ors vs State & Anr on 21 August, 2017
Author: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3271 / 2016
1. Brijesh Chouhan S/o Sh. Shivnandan Singh, R/o Village Kauwa
Tada Tehsil Bhogaon Distt. Mainpuri Police Station Devar Uttar
Pradesh
2. Munni Devi W/o Sh. Brijesh Chouhan, R/o Village Kauwa Tada
Tehsil Bhogaon Distt. Mainpuri Police Station Devar Uttar Pradesh
3. Rubi D/o Sh. Brijesh Chouhan, R/o Village Kauwa Tada Tehsil
Bhogaon Distt. Mainpuri Police Station Devar Uttar Pradesh
4. Ajeet Chouhan S/o Sh. Brijesh Chauhan, R/o Village Kauwa
Tada Tehsil Bhogaon Distt. Mainpuri Police Station Devar Uttar
Pradesh
5. Shailendra Chouhan S/o Sh. Dinesh Chand, R/o Village Kauwa
Tada Tehsil Bhogaon Distt. Mainpuri Police Station Devar Uttar
Pradesh
6. Uttirn Chouhan S/o Sh. Brijesh Chouhan, R/o Village Kauwa
Tada Tehsil Bhogaon Distt. Mainpuri Police Station Devar Uttar
Pradesh
----Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan
2. Aarti Chouhan W/o Sh. Uttirn Chouhan D/o Harivansh Singh,
H.n. c 58 Pasharvnath City Bye Pass Road Sangariya Jodhpur
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sushil Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. VS Rajpurohit, PP
Mr. Pradeep Choudhary, for the complainant
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order 21/08/2017
1. Petitioners have preferred this misc. petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of the FIR No.131/2016 dated (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3271/2016] 03.08.2016 registered at Mahila Police Station (West) Jodhpur, for the offences under Sections 498-A, 406, 313 of IPC.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that prima facie the investigation is made out on the face of the FIR at Rajasthan as the alleged incidents have happened in Uttar Pradesh. Learned counsel for the petitioner has cited the precedent law in Amarendu Jyoti & Ors. Vs. State of Chhottisgarh & Ors. reported in (2014) 12 Supreme Court Cases, 362 , whereby dealing with the law of Section 178 C and 179 of Cr.P.C., a territorial jurisdiction has been adjudicated.
3. Leaned counsel for the respondent however, has opposed the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner and stated that FIR itself clearly mentions deposition of amount of Rs.40,000/- here in Rajasthan and therefore, the cause of action as the demand of dowry has been fulfilled here. Learned counsel for the respondent has stated that even if there is continuous commission of offence, then under Section 178 C the jurisdiction of the criminal court in Rajasthan shall remain.
4. After hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the deposition of amount of Rs.40,000/- here at Jodhpur, in Rajasthan for the purpose of fulfilling the demand of dowry is sufficient act to attract the provisions of Section 178 C.
5. Consequently, the present misc. petition is dismissed.
(DR. PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI)J. sudheer