Full Name		Full Name is required
Email ID		Email ID required Invalid Email is ID
(this email-id will be treated as your User ID also)
Address
City		City required
Mobile No		Mobile No is required Invalid Mobile No
	* Mobile No is required for verification of identity

Head Note

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  - Section 177 , Section 178 , Section 179 , Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 489-A , Section 406 , Section 34 , The Dowry Prohibition Act,1961  - Section 3 , Section 4

- Jurisdiction - Appellant (Wife) got married to respondent no. 2 at Gaya and moved to her matrimonial home at Ranchi - Immediately after the marriage, respondents (appellant's husband and his relatives) started harassing and torturing appellant for bringing less dowry - Appellant lodged FIR u/ss. 498A and 406 r/w. s. 34 of IPC and ss. 3 and 4 of 1961 Act at Gaya - The Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance against respondents - On appeal, HC held that the proceedings at Gaya were not maintainable for lack of jurisdiction and quashed the entire proceedings at Gaya with liberty to the appellant to file the same in appropriate Court - Hence, the instant appeal - Whether criminal proceedings initiated by the appellant at Gaya against her husband and his relatives were maintainable or not for lack of jurisdiction? - Held, in view of ss. 178 and 179 of the Code, the impugned offence was a continuing one and the episode at Gaya was only a consequence of continuing offence of harassment of ill - Treatment meted out to the appellant - Hence, the Magistrate at Gaya had jurisdiction to proceed with the criminal case instituted therein - Impugned order of the HC holding that the proceedings at Gaya were not maintainable due to lack of jurisdiction cannot be sustained, hence, set aside - Appeals allowed.

Topic(s)-

Important Decision(s)- CrPC, ss. 177, 178, 179 - IPC 498A, 406 r/w s. 34 - DP Act ss. 3, 4 - Jurisdiction - Married at Gaya matrimonial home at Ranchi - Lodged FIR at Gaya - Magistrate cognizance - HC quashed with liberty file appropriate Court - Offence was a continuing - Magistrate at Gaya had jurisdiction to proceed.