Delhi District Court
State (Nct Of Delhi) vs Sh. Ashish Kawatra on 29 May, 2019
IN THE COURT OF AJAY GOEL, ADDITIONAL SESSIONS
JUDGE/SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS), DWARKA COURTS, NEW
DELHI.
Criminal Revision No. 428/18
In the Matter of:
State (NCT of Delhi) .... Revisionist
Versus
Sh. Ashish Kawatra,
S/o Late Sh. Subhash Kawatra,
R/o 1168, S Loggers Pond, PL,
#15 Boise,
Idaho, USA83760.
Also At:
H.No.11, Rajinder Park,
Near Mahesh Nagar,
Ambala Cantt,
Haryana. ....Respondent
Date of Institution of the Revision petition : 18.10.2018
Date of Arguments : 29.05.2019
Date on which judgment was pronounced : 29.05.2019
JUDGMENT:
1. Vide this Judgment, I shall dispose of the present revision CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.1/8 petition filed against the Order dated 21.08.2018 passed by the court of Ms. Richa Gusain Solanki, Ld. MM01 (Mahila Court), Dwarka Courts, Delhi in complaint case No. 434279/2016 titled as ''State vs. Ashish Kwatra Etc.".
2. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant Sapna Kawatra got married to accused Ashish Kawatra on 21.02.2002 and soon after the marriage, she was being harassed for not bringing Esteem Car and sufficient dowry by her inlaws. The complainant made a complaint to PS CWC/Nanakpura which resulted into registration of FIR against her husband and inlaws. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed against the husband in the Court of learned MM for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. The learned MM took the cognizance in the matter and listed the case for consideration of charge.
3. After hearing arguments on the point of charge, vide order dated 21.08.2018 the learned MM opined that merely because the CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.2/8 complainant started residing in Delhi after leaving USA does not mean that the jurisdiction of Delhi Courts can be entertained. While relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Y. Abraham Ajith and Ors. vs. State, NCT of Delhi & Anr. (decided on 02.05.2013), Amarendu Jyoti & Ors. vs. State of Chhatisgarh & Ors. (decided on 04.08.2014) and decision of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Malkiat Singh & Ors. vs. State & Anr. Reported as 121 (2005) DLT 668, the learned MM directed for return of chargesheet to PS Nanakpura for presenting the same before the appropriate court.
4. Feeling aggrieved by the above order of the learned MM, the State preferred the instant revision petition on the ground that the learned MM has erroneously and illegally held that no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of the Court. The learned MM also failed to appreciate the fact that the instance of cruelty upon the CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.3/8 complainant started in 2002 itself when the accused/respondent Ashish Kawatra visited the house of complainant at Janak Puri for the first time after the marriage and taunted her father by saying that car was not given in the marriage. The learned MM also failed to note of the fact that the instances of cruelty continued thereafter on various dates and at various places and finally, on 05.08.2013 the husband of the complainant left for USA without taking the complainant with him despite legal notice given by her in this regard.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/husband has submitted that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order of the learned Trial Court. The learned MM has correctly opined that the complaint does not reveal any demand of dowry by the accused at any point of time. Learned counsel for the accused has prayed for dismissal of the revision petition being meritless. CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.4/8
6. I have heard Sh. Dushyant Siwatch, ld. Addl. PP for the State/revisionist and Sh. S.K. Grover, Ld. Counsel for the respondent. I have also gone through the entire material placed on record.
7. During the course of arguments, learned Addl. PP for the State/revisionist has placed reliance upon a decision of Hon'ble High Court in Dr. Baljeet Singh vs. State, NCT of Delhi & Anr. in W.P.(Crl.) No.503/2013 decided on 02.05.2013 and a recent decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Rupali Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. In Crl.A. No.71/2012 decided on 09/04/2019. I have gone through the said judgments.
8. In the case Rupali Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (Supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court, while answering the reference, discussed its earlier decisions on the issue and held that the courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.5/8 matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual situation, also have jurisdictions to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offences under Section 498A IPC.
9. In the instant case, the learned Trial Court has failed to consider the fact that the marriage of the complainant took place at Janak Puri, New Delhi which area falls within the jurisdiction of Courts at Dwarka.
10. In view the above decisions in Rupali Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (Supra) and Dr. Baljeet Singh vs. State, NCT of Delhi & Arn. (Supra), I am of the considered view that the Courts at Delhi have the necessary territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the instant case. Accordingly, the revision petition is hereby allowed and the order dated 21.08.2013 passed by learned MM01 (Mahila Court), Dwarka Courts is set aside. The CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.6/8 accused/respondent is directed to face trial before the Trial Court as per law.
11. Since the impugned order was passed on the point of jurisdiction only and the contentions raised by the parties on the point of charge were not considered and no finding was given on this aspect, the learned Trial Court is directed to hear the case afresh on the point of charge and pass a fresh order as per law.
12. Parties are directed to appear before the learned MM/Trial Court on 05.07.2019. In case, accused or his counsel does not appear on 05.07.2019 before the learned Trial Court, then the learned Trial Court will proceed by taking coercive process against the accused as per law.
13. Nothing stated herein above shall tentamount to have expression or opinion on the merits of the case. CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.7/8
14. Revision is accordingly disposed off.
15. TCR be sent back alongwith copy of this order and revision Digitally signed by file be consigned to Record Room. AJAY AJAY GOEL Date:
GOEL 2019.05.30
13:06:46
+0530
Pronounced in the open court. (Ajay Goel)
Dated : 29.05.2019 ASJ/Special Judge(NDPS),
Dwarka Courts, New Delhi.
CR 428/2018 State Vs Ashish Kawatra Page No.8/8