Crl.Misc.No.M-3447 of 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-3447 of 2009 . Decided on: March 30, 2010. Pankaj Mahajan and another .. Petitioners VERSUS Kajal Mahajan and another .. Respondents * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Gurmeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr.Raghbir Chaudhary, Sr. DAG., Punjab. Mr.Anil Chawla, Advocate, for respondent No.1. M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) This is a petition for transfer of complaint filed by respondent No.1, under Sections 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, from the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Anandpur Sahib to District Courts, Amritsar, on the ground that after marriage the parties resided together at Amritsar and even a female child was born out of this wedlock. A perusal of the file indicates that divorce had been granted to petitioner No.1, against respondent No.1, but the said judgment has been set aside in appeal. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Court at Amritsar has no jurisdiction to entertain a complaint as cause of action has arisen in Amritsar only. . . . 1 Crl.Misc.No.M-3447 of 2009 I have considered the circumstances of the present case. The complaint having been filed at Anandpur Sahib by the respondent on the basis of her residence at Amritsar is maintainable. The convenience of both the parties is required to be seen while considering the application for transfer. No circumstance exist for transfer of the complaint under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. It is not out of place to observe here that complaint under Section 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act has been filed on the allegations that the jewellery and other costly items of stridhan of complainant have not been returned. Taking an analogy from the provisions of Section 181 (4) Cr.P.C., I am of the opinion that when there are allegations of criminal misappropriation of breach of trust regarding a property, the criminal proceedings can be initiated at a place where the articles are required to be returned or accounted for by the accused persons. In the present case, the respondents have got a right to continue with the proceedings as the alleged articles of stridhan are required to be returned and accounted for by the petitiones at Fatehgarh Sahib. No ground is made out for transfer. Dismissed. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE March 30, 2010. rka . . . 2