Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
CRR-2503-2015 on 10 June, 2016
Author: Joymalya Bagchi
Bench: Joymalya Bagchi
1 10.06.16
107/skp.
C.R.R. 2503 of 2015 In Re : Tamoris Bhattacharyya & Ors. .. Petitioners.
Mr. Arindam Sen, Mr. Saurav Basu .... For the opposite party no. 2. Petitioners have prayed for quashing of the proceeding being Complaint Case No. AC 2464 of 2014 pending before the learned 9th Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas.
I have perused the petition of complaint.
In the petition of complaint, it has been alleged that the petitioners had subjected the opposite party no. 2/wife to mental and physical torture on demands of dowry. It is further alleged that Stridhan articles were misappropriated. Prima facie, allegations disclose ingredients of the alleged offences.
I find that the proceeding is at an initial stage and a prayer has been made for recovery of Stridhan articles by issuance of search warrant. The only issue raised in this petition is that no part of the offences took place during the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate. I find that the offences alleged in the complaint are under Section 498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been alleged in the petition of complaint particularly in paragraph 11 thereof that the petitioner no. 1 had behaved rudely over telephone with the father of the complainant. That apart, it has been alleged that after being driven out from the matrimonial home the opposite party no. 2 took refuge at her parental home 2 within the territorial jurisdiction of this trial court and demanded return of the stridhan articles which had been withheld by the petitioners. Such accusation transpires from the averments in the petition of complaint particularly paragraph 15 thereof. Section 181(4) Cr.P.C., inter alia, provides that the offence of criminal breach of trust may be entertained and tried at the place where the accused persons are called upon to account for the misappropriated property.
Under the aforesaid factual backdrop when the opposite party no. 2 called upon the petitioners to return her stridhan articles to her while she was residing at her parental home within the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate, I am of the opinion that the learned Magistrate had adequate jurisdiction to entertain and try the instant petition of complaint in view of Section 181(4) Cr.P.C.
For the aforementioned reason, I find that there is no merit in the instant petition. The petition is, accordingly dismissed.
The learned Magistrate is directed to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on usual undertaking.
(Joymalya Bagchi, J.) 3