Magistrate lacked jurisdiction in 498A case. Cause of action must align with court jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court held that the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate in Sri Ganganagar lacked jurisdiction to try offences under sections 498A and 406 IPC as the cause of action did not arise in Rajasthan where the complainant resided. The complaint was directed to be returned for filing in the appropriate court with jurisdiction, quashing the proceedings before the Magistrate. The decision was based on the principle that the cause of action must align with the court's jurisdiction trying the offence.

---

---

Issues involved: Jurisdiction of the court to try offences u/s 498A and 406 IPC based on the place where the cause of action accrued.

Summary:

Jurisdiction of the Court:
The complainant lodged a complaint u/s 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, leading to the registration of FIR against the appellants for offences u/s 498A, 406, and 147 IPC. The charges were framed for offences u/s 498A and 406 IPC. The appellants contended that the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try the offences as the cause of action arose outside its jurisdiction. The Revision Petition and the S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition were rejected, affirming the jurisdiction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar. The High Court held that the offence of cruelty being a continuing one, the complaint cannot be dismissed as time-barred, and the court in Sri Ganganagar had jurisdiction to try the case since the complainant was residing there. However, the Supreme Court found that no part of the cause of action arose in Rajasthan where the complainant was currently residing, and thus, the Magistrate in Sri Ganganagar had no jurisdiction to deal with the matter.

Precedent and Conclusion:
The appellants relied on a previous decision of the Court which held that the cause of action must have arisen within the jurisdiction of the court trying the offence. The facts revealed that the alleged acts took place in Punjab, not Rajasthan. Therefore, the proceedings before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Ganganagar were quashed, and the complaint was directed to be returned to the complainant for filing in the appropriate court with jurisdiction. The appeal was allowed accordingly.

---