Territorial jurisdiction for police investigation cannot be cured by later facts when the local nexus is absent.

Territorial jurisdiction for police investigation under the Code of Criminal Procedure was examined in relation to alleged threatening and blackmailing calls made to the complainant's residence at Chengannur. The text states that, under Sections 156(1) and 177 CrPC, investigation must correspond to the jurisdiction of the court competent to inquire into or try the offence, and that the Museum Police Station had no territorial nexus with the alleged crime. It further notes that forwarding the complaint by higher police authorities, or a later statement linking the matter to Thiruvananthapuram, could not cure the original want of jurisdiction. The revision was allowed, the accused was discharged, and transfer to the proper police station was left open.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Museum Police Station had territorial jurisdiction to register and investigate the crime, and whether the order refusing discharge was sustainable.

Analysis: The complaint disclosed that the alleged threatening and blackmailing calls were made to the complainant's residence at Chengannur, which was the place where the offence was committed for the purpose of investigation and trial. Under Section 156(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the power of the police officer to investigate a cognizable case is co-extensive with the jurisdiction of the court competent to inquire into or try the offence, and under Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 every offence is ordinarily to be inquired into and tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. Since the Museum Police Station had no territorial nexus with the alleged offence, it could not assume jurisdiction merely because the complaint was forwarded to it by higher police authorities. The later statement recorded to connect the matter with Thiruvananthapuram could not cure the original want of jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The Museum Police Station lacked jurisdiction to register and investigate the case, and the order refusing discharge was unsustainable.

Final Conclusion: The revision was allowed and the accused was discharged, leaving it open to have the complaint transferred to the police station having jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: A police station can investigate a cognizable offence only when the local court would have jurisdiction to inquire into or try it, and an investigation begun by a police station lacking territorial jurisdiction is without authority and cannot be validated by subsequent manipulation of facts.

---