HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1695 OF 2009 DATE:13.07.2010 Between: B. Shashidhar …… Petitioner. And: The State, rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court of AP., Hyderabad. …..Respondent. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1695 OF 2009 ORDER: 1. The petitioner is accused of offences punishable under Sections 307 and 498-A IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in Sessions Case No.412 of 2009 on the file of II Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. He filed petition under Section 227 Cr.P.C in the lower court for discharging him from the case. The lower court dismissed the said petition by order dated 03.10.2009 in Criminal M.P.No.335 of 2009 in S.C.No.412 of 2009. Questioning the said order, the petitioner/accused filed this revision petition. 2. The victim/defacto-complainant is wife of the accused. It is alleged that marriage of the victim with the accused took place on 08.03.2003 and that at the time of her marriage with the accused, her parents provided dowry of Rs.1,00,000/- and that after marriage both of them resided together in a rented house at Vivekananda Nagar Colony, near Shaikpet Nala and thereafter at Shivaganga Nagar, Chatrinaka and that six months after marriage, the accused started harassing the victim mentally and physically and also attempted to kill her by strangulating her neck for brining more dowry from her parents and that the accused threatened her to kill and to divorce her and that in spite of her relations convincing the accused, the accused never stopped his harassment and did not change his attitude and that on 22.06.2006 the accused beat her for the sake of more dowry and attempted to kill her by strangulating her neck and asking her to leave him and that on her hue and cry, neighbours rescued her and that the accused kicked her away from his house. 3. It is contention of the petitioner that no offence took place within the limits of Chatrinaka police station and that even as per evidence of the defacto-complainant in F.C.O.P.No.738 of 2006 on the file of Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad, no such offence as alleged took place and that on the influence of maternal uncle of the defacto-complainant by name B. Gnaneshwar Rao working as Senior Civil Judge, Chatrinaka police registered false case and filed charge sheet without they having territorial jurisdiction. The petitioner’s counsel contended that documents produced by the accused also should be taken into account while disposing of a petition for discharge of the accused by the lower court. While considering oral evidence of the defacto-complainant herein in F.C.O.P.No.38 of 2006, the criminal court cannot brush aside statement of the defacto-complainant contained in report given under Section 154 Cr.P.C and also her statement recorded by the investigating officer under Section 161(3) Cr.P.C during investigation. There is no dispute that statements of the defacto-complainant/victim and other witnesses examined by the investigating officer during investigation under Section 161(3) Cr.P.C. prima facie disclose the offences for which cognizance was taken by the Magistrate. In case, there are any contra-versions given by the defacto-complainant during her evidence in F.C.O.P.No.738 of 2006, then it is a matter for appreciation of her evidence by the Sessions court after trial, in case oral evidence of the defacto-complainant/victim in F.C.O.P.No.738 of 2008 is properly and legally brought on record during trial of the sessions case. In a petition under Section 227 Cr.P.C, the criminal court cannot undertake assessment of evidence. The criminal court has to see whether from the material collected by the police during investigation and produced along with charge sheet, prima facie disclose offences for framing charges for which cognizance was taken. 4. Whether the alleged offence took place at Shaikpet within Lunger House police station limits or whether the offence took place within Chatrinaka police station limits, it matters little for the lower court because both the said police stations are located within Hyderabad only and within the territorial jurisdiction of the lower court. It is not as if one of the two police stations is located outside the territorial jurisdiction of the lower court. According to the defacto-complainant as well as the police, the offence also took place when the parties were living at Shivaganga Nagar within Chatrinaka police station limits. It is a matter to be decided by the trial court after both the parties leading evidence during trial. This disputed question of fact cannot be decided much less entertained during enquiry of the petition under Section 227 Cr.P.C for discharge of the accused. 5. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that the petitioner/accused was taken into custody by the Chatrinaka police when he was at Nampally. Wherever the accused is, the police are at liberty to apprehend an accused person in case a case relating to cognizable offences is registered and the accusations therein are well founded as per the material collected by the police during investigation of that case. 6. Designation of B. Gnaneshwar Rao as Senior Civil Judge is immaterial because he happened to be maternal uncle of the defacto- complainant/victim. Naturally, as maternal uncle, he may be interested in welfare of his niece who is the defacto-complainant/victim and he may support her. That cannot be a disqualification in this case much less a circumstances which throw doubt on truth or otherwise of this case. This case has to be decided by the lower court purely on the basis of merits of oral and documentary evidence to be let in by the prosecution and also by the defence if any. This Court finds that the impugned order passed by the lower court suffers from no infirmity. 7. In the result, the revision petition is dismissed. __________________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU,J. Date:13.07.2010. Gk. HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1695 OF 2009 Date:13.07.2010 Gk.