Sunday, November 2, 2014

Hubby arrestd outside 498a jurisdiction & magistrate frees him. HC questns magistrate allows re arrest of husband !!


  • A Hubby gets arrested outside 498a jurisdiction .i.e. outside the place where ALLEGED dowry offenses are supposed to have happened
  • The magistrate scrutinises the police report and finds that there is no physical assault and that the whole case is outside jurisdiction
  • So the magistrate frees him.
  • Wife moves to HC. 
  • HC questions the magistrate's actions, seeks explanations from him and also allows re arrest of husband !!

**********************************

Dictum : "..territorial jurisdiction is determinable only in respect of enquiries and trials and not for the purpose of investigation...."
  • In simple terms , it means husband and mother and sister CAN BE ARRESTED ANYWHERE !! based on wife's complaint !!
  • After they are arrested, investigated and released !!! i.e. much later, the question of jurisdiction comes into play !!!
  • So, in this case, police at liberty to arrest (re arrest ) husband who has walked free !!
  • All husbands and aspiring husbands MAY PLEASE NOTE THIS and act accordingly

*****************************disclaimer**********************************
This judgment and other similar judgments posted on this blog was / were collected from Judis nic in website and / or other websites of Govt. of India or other internet web sites like worldlii or indiankanoon or High court websites. Some notes are made by Vinayak. This is a free service provided by Vinayak (pen name). Vinayak is a member of SIF - Save Indian Family movement. SIF as a concept is committed to fighting FALSE dowry cases and elder abuse. SIF supports gender equality and a fair treatment of law abiding Indian men. Should you find the dictum in this judgment or the judgment itself repealed or amended or would like to make improvements or comments, please post a comment on the comment section of the blog and if you are reading this on tumblr please post responses as comments at vinayak.wordpress.com . Vinayak is NOT a lawyer and nothing in this blog and/or site and/or file should be considered as legal advise.
 
******************************************************************
CASE FROM JUDIS / INDIAN KANOON WEB SITE
******************************************************************

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 27.06.2014

Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.PRAKASH

Crl.R.C.(MD) No.303 of 2014

Jamia Begam                    : Petitioner/De-facto Complainant

Vs.

State represented by
Inspector of Police,
All Women Police Staion,
Manapparai,
Trichy District.
(Crime No.4 of 2014)                : Respondent/Complainant

PRAYER

Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 Cr.P.C r/w. 401 of
Criminal Procedure Code, praying to call for the records relating to Crime
No.4 of 2014 of All Women Police Station, Manapparai and set aside the order
dated 11.04.2014, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai.

************************************************
For Petitioner        :     Mr.K.Kovindarajan
For Respondent     :     Mr.P.Kannithevan
                  Government Advocate (Crl. side)
http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com
************************************************

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. side) for the State.

2.The def-facto complainant is the petitioner before this Court. It is the case of the de-facto complainant that she got married to the accused by name Nagore Meeran on 27.09.2010 and that she was subjected to cruelty and violence. The parental home of the de-facto complainant is in Manapparai within the territorial jurisdiction of the All Women Police Station, Manapparai. Therefore, she lodged a complaint with the Sub-Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Manapparai, on 11.04.2014 based on which a case in Manapparai All Women Police Station Crime No.4 of 2014 was registered on 11.04.2014 for offences under Sections 498A, 406, 506 (ii) and Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Women Harassment Act. After registering the FIR, the police arrested the said Nagore Meeran on 11.04.2014 and produced him before the Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai for remand.  http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com

The Judicial Magistrate, after going through the records had held as follows:

"Accused produced before me at 4.10 P.M. perused the available materials, no complaint of ill treatment by police, Accused sated that, he was in the police station since yesterday 8.00 P.M. perused the available materials. The accused was sent for remand alleging that he committed offences under Section 498(A), 406 and U/s.4 of Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act. The available materials would show that all the alleged occurrence took place at the matrimonial home which is located at Natham, Dindigul. Though the offence U/s.498(A) is continuing offence the same was not continued to Manapparai within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The All Women police station has no territorial jurisdiction to register the case as the offence were not done within its jurisdiction. The Investigation Officer ought to have transmitted the FIR to concerned jurisdiction police station but continued to arrest the accused which is part of investigation that too without jurisdiction hence the arrest of the accused is without jurisdiction. No doubt that when an accused of offence is forwarded to a Magistrate whether he has jurisdiction or not, he may authrise remand, and subsequently forward him to the Jurisdictional Magistrate. But it the case on hand the arrest as well as registering the case is itself without jurisdiction, hence this court declines to remand the accused to judicial custody since it is illegal arrest. In fine the request for remand is rejected and the accused is set at liberty."

3.It is the fundamental principle of criminal law that territorial jurisdiction is determinable only in respect of enquiries and trials and not for the purpose of investigation. The Supreme Court in Satvinder Kaur vs. State (Government of N.C.T. of Delhi) [AIR 1999 SC 3596] and another has held thus:

"Therefore, to say at the stage of investigation that S.H.O., Police Station, New Delhi was not having territorial jurisdiction, is on the face of it, illegal and erroneous. That apart, S.156(2) contains an embargo that no proceeding of a police officer shall be challenged on the ground that he has no territorial power to investigate."

In the light of Section 156(2) Cr.P.C., the Magistrate cannot insist upon territorial jurisdiction for investigation at the time of remand. The Magistrate in one breath says that he has the power under Section 167 Cr.P.C. to remand the accused but simultaneously, refuses to remand the accused on the specious reasoning that the police do not have territorial jurisdiction to investigate the case. This is indeed appalling and shocking. The Magistrate has set the accused at liberty when the accused was never in the custody of the Magistrate. On account of this, the accused has walked out of the Court right under the nose of the Investigating Officer making a mockery of the whole system. He has had the last laugh in this episode. This Court takes serious notice of this and calls for an explanation from the Magistrate as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for passing such an order ignoring all canons of rudimentary principles of law of remand. The police is at liberty to continue with the investigation and re- arrest the accused if in their opinion it is warranted. The order of the Magistrate shall not come in the way of this decision making process of the Investigating Officer. After the accused walked out scot free, thanks to the Magistrate, the Police were as usual dithering as to how to proceed further. The de facto complainant/victim obtained a copy of the impugned order and has approached this Court in this Revision Petition. If not for her timely intervention, all this would have got swept under the carpet and gross injustice would have occasioned.

4.In the result, the Criminal Revision Case is allowed.

The Registry is directed to place this matter before the portfolio Judge for Trichy District to call for remarks from Mr.K.Arunkumar, B.A.,B.L., Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai and take appropriate action.

To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Manapparai.

2.The Inspector of Police, All Women Police Staion, Manapparai, Trichy District.


http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ ; http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ ; http://fromvinayak.blogspot.com


***************************
A PDF version of this judgement is also uploaded here : http://1drv.ms/1wVsHOw
Those wishing to get a PDF version may visit link and benefit
***************************

*****************

FOLLOW http://twitter.com/ATMwithDick on twitter or http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or http://evinayak.tumblr.com/  FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases
  
  
regards
  
Vinayak
Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist