The State of Andhra Pradesh, through P.S. Bhongir Town, Nalgonda District & Anr. v. INSPECTOR OF POLICE (2004(8) SCC 100), wherein it was held that when

#1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, through P.S. Bhongir Town, Nalgonda District, represented by its Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Hyderabad and another. ..Respondents The Court made the following: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY ORAL ORDER Crl.P.No.6721/2007 The petitioners, who are arrayed as A-1 to A-10 in CC No.804/2006 on the file of Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhongir, filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings initiated against them. The complaint allegations would clearly disclose that the marriage of the second respondent, who is the complainant, with the first petitioner/A-1, s/o petitioner No.10/A-10 was performed on 4-1-2004 as per the Muslim caste customs; that at the time of marriage, the complainant’s father gave Rs.50,000/-, 10 tolas of gold, 20 tolas of silver, household utensils worth Rs.40,000/- and one Hero Honda Motor Cycle to the complainant and her husband voluntarily; that after the marriage, the complainant joined the matrimonial house of the petitioners at Ramgopalpet, Nallagutta, Secunderabad; that they looked the complainant well for four months; that thereafter A-1 and his relatives A-2 to A-10 demanded the complainant to get additional dowry of Rs.3 lakhs from her parents by harassing her mentally and physically; that due to unbearable harassment of the petitioners/accused, the complainant intimated to her parents on phone; that her brother-L.W.2 and her mother-L.W.3 went to her husband’s house and convinced the petitioner/accused persons but they did not heed their request; that the petitioners/accused neglected the complainant and due to their negligence, she lost her pregnancy; that since the petitioners/accused did not care the complainant, the parents of the complainant brought her back to Bhongir. From the entire allegations levelled against the petitioners, it is clear that entire acts alleged have taken place at Secunderabad and nothing has taken place at Bhongir, Nalgonda District. In view of the law declared by the Supreme Court in Y.ABRAHAM AJITH V. INSPECTOR OF POLICE (2004(8) SCC 100), wherein it was held that when the dowry harassment is alleged at a place, the Court at that place alone will have jurisdiction to try the offence and police within whose jurisdiction the commission of offence has taken place, alone will have the jurisdiction to investigate into the matter, the proceedings initiated ageist the petitioners/A-1 to A- 10 for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 804/2006 on the file of Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Bhongir, Nalgonda District cannot be continued and they are liable to be quashed since entire acts alleged have taken place at Secunderabad, and nothing has taken place at Bhongir where criminal proceedings are initiated against the petitioners. The Criminal Petition is accordingly allowed. However, it is open to the complainant to lodge a compliant within the jurisdictional police station where the alleged offence has taken place. A.GOPAL REDDY,J ______________ Dt.5-8-2010