IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRL.P.NO.3590 OF 2010. Date:21.04.2010 Between:- Meda Naga Subbaiah and another ..Petitioners/A-2 and A-3 And The State of A.P., represented by Public Prosecutor, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents ORDER:- The petitioners 1 and 2 are the accused Nos.2 and 3, who are parents-in-law of the second respondent/defacto complainant in C.C.No.492 of 2007 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of the First Class for Excise Cases, Kurnool. A-1 who is not figuring as petitioner herein is husband of the second respondent. Marriage of the second respondent with A-1 took place at Kadiri. Parents of the second respondent are residents of Mudigubba village in Kadiri Taluk. The accused are residents of Peddannavaripalli village of Talupula Mandal within the limits of Kadiri Magistrate. The petitioners are accused of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. The main contention urged by the petitioners’ counsel is that the Court at Kurnool has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the case because the entire incidents occured at Kadiri Mandal and Talupula Mandal of Ananthapur District. 3. Having no territorial jurisdiction for the Court at Kurnool, is no ground for quashing the criminal case under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At best, it may be a ground for transfer of the case from that Court to another Court having territorial jurisdiction to entertain the same. But, that contingency will not arise here because part of cause of action for the private complaint which was forwarded to the police and which resulted in filing of charge sheet occurred at Kurnool when the defacto complainant was residing at her sister’s house. 4. It is contended that the Investigating Officer did not go to the place where the couple lived together and make any investigation by examining persons from that place. Whether investigation of the case was done properly or not, it is a matter for appreciation by the trial Court during trial when the Investigating Officer will be examined and cross examined at length. It is no ground for quashing proceedings in a criminal case under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I do not see any merits in this petition. 5. Hence, the petition is dismissed. _​_________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J 21st April 2010 AMD