LI Network
Published on: November 22, 2023 at 00:10 IST
The Supreme Court clarified that the jurisdiction for entertaining complaints under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) depends on the place where the wife seeks shelter after leaving her matrimonial home due to cruelty.
The Court emphasized that the factual circumstances would determine the jurisdiction of the court. Referring to a prior 3-judge bench decision in Rupali Devi v. State of U.P., (2019) 5 SCC 384, the Supreme Court stated, “The Courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or being driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, depending on the factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offenses under Section 498-A of the IPC.”
The case in question involved a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Bangalore, who had granted extraterritorial bail to the accused husband.
The Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, considered the issue of whether the ordinary place of inquiry and trial included the location where the complainant-wife resides after separation.
Delving into the interpretation of Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the Court revisited traditional views that jurisdiction in matrimonial cases depended on the occurrence of the offense within the local jurisdiction.
However, the Court highlighted the shift brought about by the Rupali Devi case, which recognized the impact of cruelty on the mental health of the wife, even if residing in her parental home due to acts committed in the matrimonial home.
Applying this perspective, the Court concluded that the complainant-wife, facing alleged death threats and harassment, sought refuge in her parental home in Chirawa, Rajasthan. Consequently, Chirawa was considered the ordinary place of trial.
The Court set aside the extraterritorial anticipatory bail granted by the Sessions Judge in Bangalore and directed the accused husband to approach the jurisdictional court in Chirawa, Rajasthan, for anticipatory bail.
The judgment reinforces the principle that the impact on the victim’s well-being is crucial in determining the jurisdiction for Section 498A IPC complaints.
The Court’s decision reflects a nuanced understanding of the dynamics involved in cases of cruelty against married women and seeks to ensure that justice is delivered with sensitivity to the victim’s circumstances.
Case Title: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka
