Allowed

Gopal Lal Sharma v. State

Rajasthan HC2 Feb 2012CRLMP/1525/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition, the court held that the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana lacked territorial jurisdiction to try sections 498A IPC offences committed in Jaipur. The court ordered the transfer of the criminal case file.

What did the court decide?

The misc. petition succeeded; the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana is directed to send the file to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Metropolitan, Jaipur for trial.

Gopal Lal Sharma Vs State — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Rajasthan HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1525/2009 (Gopal Lal Sharma Vs. State of Rajasthan)

¶3

DATE OF ORDER : 2^nd February, 2012

¶4

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

¶5

Mr. Suresh Kumbhat, Mr. Sheetal Kumbhat, for the petitioner. Mrs. Chandralekha, Public Prosecutor.

¶6

The present misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the proceedings going on against him in the court of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana in Criminal Case No.120/2008 and being aggrieved by the order dated 17.01.2009 passed by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana framing the charges against the petitioner for offence under Section 498A IPC as affirmed in revision by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Parbatsar by his order dated 25.07.2009 in Criminal Revision No.18/2009.

¶7

Assailing the proceedings going on against the petitioner, the principal ground of challenge which has been canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that none of the causes of action for trying the petitioner for offence under Section 498A IPC has arisen in the territorial jurisdiction of the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana because as per the highest allegation of the complainant in her complaint as well as in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. all the alleged acts of cruelty have been stated to have been committed at her matrimonial home, which is at Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. Thus, while placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhura Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &

¶8

¶9

Ors., reported in 2008 (11) SCC 103, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana are impermissible because the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana lacks jurisdiction to try the case.

¶10

Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer made and submits that now the charge-sheet has been filed in the matter and the charges have also been framed against the accused, thus, the trial of the case is very much permissible in the court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana.

¶11

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the orders impugned passed by the learned courts below and have given thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced at the bar.

¶12

A perusal of the complaint filed by the complainant and the statement of the complainant and the other witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. reveal that all the acts of cruelty which the complainant has alleged upon were committed at her matrimonial home, which is at Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. There is no allegation of the complainant that she was ever harassed or humiliated by the accused or that any act of cruelty as defined under Section 498A IPC was committed on her by the accused persons at Makrana.

¶13

Resultantly, this court is of the opinion tested in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Bhura Ram (supra), the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makarana does not have jurisdiction to try the case. The case at best can

¶14

¶15

be tried by the court having jurisdiction for trying the offences committed in the area of Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur.

¶16

Accordingly, this misc. petition succeeds. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Makrana is directed to send the file of Criminal Case No.120/2008 to the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Metropolitan, Jaipur, who shall thereafter transfer the case for trial to the appropriate court.

¶17

The accused shall appear before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Metropolitan, Jaipur on 12.03.2012 and thereafter on all subsequent dates of hearing till the conclusion of the trial.

¶18

The misc. petition as well as stay petition stand disposed of accordingly.

¶19

(SANDEEP MEHTA), J.

¶20

ms rathore

Gopal Lal Sharma v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Lal Sharma v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ishwar Lal Vs State and Anr.

Kuldeepak Bothra Vs State

Mani Ram and Ors. Vs State and Anr.

Rajkumar Khemani and Ors. Vs State and Anr.

Laxman Singh Vs State and Anr.

Rata Ram Vs State and Ors.