Cr.Misc. NO. M 9479 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Cr.Misc. NO. M 9479 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION 2.4.2009 Rakesh Kumar and others ......PETITIONER VERSUS State of Punjab and another ......RESPONDENTS PRESENT: Mr. KPS Sandhu, Advocate M.M.S.BEDI,J. The petitioners seek the quashing of FIR, registered against them for offence u/s 352/496/498A/406 IPC at P.S. Phase VIII, Mohali on the ground that the petitioners are resident of Amritsar. The complainant after marriage had been residing at Amritsar. The dowry articles have already been returned. No occurrence has taken place at Mohali, as such in view of the provisions of Sections 177 and 178 Cr.P.C. the place of inquiry and trial can only be at places where the offence was committed. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on Manish Ratan & Ors vs State of M.P. & Anr, 2006(3) Apex Court Judgments 672. In the said case the incident of cruelty had taken place at matrimonial home at Jabalpur. The wife in order to save her life, left the matrimonial home and started living with her parents. An FIR was registered at Datia where the wife was living with her parents. The quashing of FIR was prayed for. In the said case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had not quashed the proceedings but had directed the transfer of the criminal case pending in the court of CJM Datia to the court of CJM, Jabalpur. Relying upon the said judgment, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the court at Mohali or the investigating agency at Mohali will have no jurisdiction. Cr.Misc. NO. M 9479 of 2009 2 I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and gone through the allegations against the petitioners. Admittedly, the complainant is residing in Mohali. As per the provisions of Section 181(4) Cr.P.C. when offence of criminal misappropriation or of criminal breach of trust is committed, the matter can be enquired into or tried by a Court within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed or any part of the property which is the subject matter of the offence was received or retained or was required to be returned or accounted for, by the accused person. In the present case, the present residence of the complainant is at Mohali. The articles of dowry, alleged to have been misappropriated, were required to be returned or accounted for at Mohali, as such the investigating agency or the court at Mohali will have the jurisdiction if seen in context to the provisions of Section 181(4) read with Section 178 Cr.P.C. The ratio of the said judgment, cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners, is not applicable to the present case. Even otherwise, while exercising the powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the inquiry or trial cannot be transferred from Mohali to Amritsar. In view of the above circumstances, there is no ground to quash the FIR on the basis of lack of jurisdiction by the investigating agency or the Court at Mohali. Dismissed. This order will not debar the petitioners to seek any other remedy, in accordance with law, challenging the criminal proceedings by brining the same within the parameters of the law laid down in State of Haryana and Ors vs Ch. Bhajan Lal AIR 1992 SC 604. April 2 ,2009 ( M.M.S.BEDI ) TSM JUDGE