This High Court dismissed a filing seeking to quash an order of cognizance under Section 498-A IPC. The Court upheld the Magistrate's jurisdiction where the victim, driven out of the matrimonial home due to cruelty, lodged the FIR at her parents' residence, citing precedent.
CRLMC dismissed being devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLMC No.2143 of 2016
Hemalata Samal and another …. Petitioners Mr.P.K. Nayak, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha
…. Opposite Party Mrs. S. Patnaik, AGA
CORAM:
JUSTICE CHITTARANJAN DASH
ORDER
Order No.
16.09.2022
Page 1 of 3
// 2 //
“It is not necessary that a complaint should be filed only at the place of the matrimonial home. The courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offences under Section 498- A of the Indian Penal Code.”
5. The Apex Court further held that:
“Even if the acts of physical cruelty committed in the matrimonial house may have ceased and such acts do not occur at the parental home, there can be no doubt that the mental trauma and the psychological distress caused by the acts of the husband including verbal exchanges, if any, that had compelled the wife to
Page 2 of 3
// 3 //
leave the matrimonial home and take shelter with her parents would continue to persist at the parental home. Mental cruelty borne out of physical cruelty or abusive and humiliating verbal exchanges would continue in the parental home even though there may not be any overt act of physical cruelty at such place.”
(Chittaranjan Dash)
Judge
KC Bisoi
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Magistrate took cognizance rightfully despite the cause of action allegedly arising outside the territorial jurisdiction.
Whether the High Court can invoke its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order of cognizance.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Rupali Devi v. State of Uttar PradeshExplained¶18
Rupali Devi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2019 (5) SCC 384 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Hemalata Samal
State of Odisha
Chittaranjan Dash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
