TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 2115
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hardwaj, G.R. Pandey, Shyamal Kumar, Rajesh Kumar Chaurasia, Sunil Kumar, Abha R. Sharma, Dhirendra Singh Parmar, Sujeeta Srivastava, Mahendra Singh, Parmanand Gaur, Ekansh Bansal, Swarupama Chaturvedi, B.N. Dubey, Mukesh Kumar, Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Ashutosh Kumar Sharma and Ugra Shankar Prasad, Advs. JUDGMENT Ranjan Gogoi, C.J.I. 1. "Whether a woman forced to leave her matrimonial home on account of acts and conduct that constitute cruelty can initiate and access the legal process within the jurisdiction of the courts where she is forced to take shelter with the parents or other family members". This is the precise question that arises for determination in this group of appeals. 2. The opinions of this Court on the aforesaid question being sharply divided, the present reference to a larger Bench has been made for consideration of the question indicated hereinabove. 3. In (i) Y. Abraham Ajith and Ors. v. Inspector of Police, Chennai and Anr. (2004) 8 SCC 100. (ii) Ramesh and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu (2005) 3 SCC 507. (iii) Manish Ratan and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. (2007) 1 SCC 262. (iv) Amarendu Jyoti and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. (201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Suresh Kaushal (Supra) as the miscarriage was caused to the wife at Jabalpur, her parental home, on account of cruelty meted out to her in the matrimonial home, it was held that the court at the place of the parental home of the wife would have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint Under Section 179 Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. The above two views which the learned referring bench had considered while making the present reference, as already noticed, were founded on the peculiar facts of the two sets of cases before the Court. It may be possible to sustain both the views in the light of the facts of the cases in which such view was rendered by this Court. What confronts the court in the present case is however different. Whether in a case where cruelty had been committed in a matrimonial home by the husband or the relatives of the husband and the wife leaves the matrimonial home and takes shelter in the parental home located at a different place, would the courts situated at the place of the parental home of the wife have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint Under Section 498A. This is in a situation where no overt act of cruelty or harassment is alleged to have been commit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thin whose jurisdiction the criminal act is committed will cease to have exclusive jurisdiction to try the offence. 9. At this stage it may also be useful to take note of what can be understood to a continuing offence. The issue is no longer res integra having been answered by this Court in State of Bihar v. Deokaran Nenshi (1972) 2 SCC 890. Para 5 may be usefully noticed in this regard. 5. A continuing offence is one which is susceptible of continuance and is distinguishable from the one which is committed once and for all. It is one of those offences which arises out of a failure to obey or comply with a Rule or its requirement and which involves a penalty, the liability for which continues until the Rule or its requirement is obeyed or complied with. On every occasion that such disobedience or non-compliance occurs and reoccurs, there is the offence committed. The distinction between the two kinds of offences is between an act or omission which constitutes an offence once and for all and an act or omission which continues, and therefore, constitutes a fresh offence every time or occasion on which it continues. In the case of a continuing offence, there is thus the ingredient ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman to be drawn if such suicide had been committed within a period of seven years from the date of marriage of the married woman and she had been subjected to cruelty. Section 113A is in the following term: 113-A. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman.- When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section, "cruelty" shall have the same meaning as in Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). 13. The object behind the aforesaid amendment, undoubtedly, was to combat the increasing cases of cruelty by the husband and the relatives of the husband on the wife which leads to commission of suicides or grave injury to the wife b....