IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24609 of 2011 Rekha Kumari Versus The State Of Bihar & Ors ----------- 2/ 26.7.2011 The restoration petition has been put up with the main SLA No. 71 of 2010. SLA is restored to its original number and file. Heard learned counsel for the parties upon the application seeking special leave of this Court to appeal against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa in Complaint Case no. 703 C of 2004 / Tr. No. 1037 of 2010 by which, while convicting the accused Ashwini Chandra, the learned trial court acquitted the four accused persons, who are respondent nos. 2 to 5. I have gone through the judgment and found that while considering the evidence on record, the learned trial court applied his judicial mind properly and has marshaled the facts correctly. One observation of the learned trial judge appears erroneous but that could not go to the root of the matter as the leaned trial court has not acquitted the respondents on that ground. The SDJM has held that the occurrence appeared taking place both at Bokaro and Preman Bigaha and there was no complaint filed for the part of the occurrence at Bokaro. Learned trial judge is probably missing the provision of section 179 Cr.P.C. which relates to the cause and effect of an offence, especially when the offence appears a continuing one. The 2 Supreme Court has now held that an offence under section 498A IPC is a continuing offence and its cause might have taken place at one place but the effect might have ensued at the other place in two different jurisdictions and the complaint could be filed in either of the two jurisdictions. As such, non filing of the complaint at Bokaro appears of no consequence. After having considered the judgment of acquittal, I do not find any perversity in the same the application seeking special leave to appeal is dismissed. Anil/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)