AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Umesh A. Trivedi, J
Heard Mr.Nisarg Jain, learned advocate or the applicant.
The grievances raised in this application is that the investigating officer though has registered an offence under Sections 498-A, 376, 377, 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code, however, he has transferred the said F.I.R. to the Barwala Police Station on the ground that the alleged incident occurred in the jurisdiction of Barwala Police Station. He has further submitted that along with the other offence, an offence under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code is also invoked by the First Informant. He has relied on a decision in the case of Rupali Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in AIR 2019 SC 1790. He has submitted that in view of the decision, the victim of harassment, either it may be physical or mental on a married women, can maintain prosecution wherever she stays. If the Court concerned is having jurisdiction with that area, it is surprising how the police would not have such jurisdiction where consequences of cruelty ensued at that place.
Mr. Dharmesh Devnani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor is unable to distinguish the said judgement. However, he has submitted that since every offence alleged against the named accused are within the territorial jurisdiction of Barwala Police Station it has been transferred vide communication dated 28.12.2019.
Rule. Mr. Dharmesh Devnani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-State.
Considering the contents of First Information Report as also the reported decision in the case of Rupali Devi (supra), it is clear that the local police station concerned i.e. Mahila Police Station, Vadodara City, is having territorial jurisdiction to entertain the First Information Report, so far as part of offence is concerned, that police station still have jurisdiction to investigate whatever offences revealed during the course of investigation of the same. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, if the Court concerned is having jurisdiction for entertaining a complaint under Section 498-A wherever the victim resides, this Court fails to envisage the situation that the police will not have the jurisdiction over that First Information Report for the purpose of investigation also. If Magistrate sends the said complaint for an investigation under Section 156(3) of Indian Penal Code, the local police station is supposed to register an offence. Therefore, there is no harm or any breach of territorial jurisdiction if Mahila Police Station, Vadodara City registers an offence and starts with the investigation. Hence, communication dated 28.12.2019 made by In-charge Inspector of Mahila Police Station, Vadodara City addressed to Police Inspector of Barwala Police Station, District: Botad, transferring the investigation into an offence registered at C.R. No.I-00 of 2019 for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 376, 377, 323, 504, 506(2) and 114 of Indian Penal Code on an F.I.R. registered by the applicant, is hereby quashed and set aside. The In-charge Police Inspector of Mahila Police Station, Vadodara City, is hereby directed to register an offence and investigate into the same and file necessary report on conclusion of it, in respect of the F.I.R. given by the petitioner.
Application is allowed. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.