MRS. ARCHANA SHRIVASTAVA AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS W/O MR. DHARMESH SHRIVSTAVA R/O HOUSE NO. 937, STREET NO. 3. BAI KA BAGICHA GHAMAPUR, JABALPUR (M. P.)

 IN THE COURT OF    ADDITIONAL SESSION JUDGE, SAGAR

CRIMINAL REVISION No.             OF 2005

1.      AJEET PRAKASH ADHOLIYA

          AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS

          S/o MR. BRAJ BIHARI LAL ADHOLIYA

          R/o SECTOR - 5, BLOCK - GP & EP, SALT LAKE, ELECTRONICS COMPLEX, KOLKATA - 700 091 (WEST BENGAL)

2.      BRAJ BIHARI LAL ADHOLIYA

          AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS

          S/o LATE MR. MATA PRASAD ADHOLIYA

3.      MRS. CHANDRA PRABHA ADHOLIYA

          AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS

          W/O MR. BRAJ BIHARI LAL ADHOLIYA

No. 2 & 3 ARE ALL R/o HOUSE NO. 34, KACHNAR, CITY, POLICE STATION - LORDGANJ, JABALPUR (M. P.).

4.      MRS. ARCHANA SHRIVASTAVA

          AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS

          W/O MR. DHARMESH SHRIVSTAVA

          R/O HOUSE NO. 937, STREET NO. 3. BAI KA BAGICHA

          GHAMAPUR, JABALPUR (M. P.)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

THROUGH THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER

POLICE STATION - MAHILA THANA

DISTRICT- SAGAR (M. P.)

CRIME NO. 11/2005

OFFENCE U/s 498-A, 294, 34 IPC (45 of 1860).

CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION 397 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1974.

Being aggreived by the Judgement and Order dated 19.11.2005 passed by the  Learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, P. O.- Mr.     Sagar, in Criminal Case No. 300 / 2005 in the matter of the state of Madhya Pradesh v/s Ajeet Prakash & Ors.the applicants named above most humbly and respectfully beg to prefer this revision petition on following facts and grounds amongest the others:

FACTS OF THE CASE

1.      The applicants are the husband, parents-in-law and sisters-in-law of the complainant Mrs. Vijaya Shrivastava. The gist of the allegation of the complainant, Mrs. Vijaya Shrivastava is that on account of dowry demands, she had been mal-treated and humiliated not only in the house of the in-laws at Jabalpur but as a consequence of such events, the husband of the complainant had also demanded dowry at Kolkata and had also assaulted her.

2.      The applicants contended before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sagar that the criminal case was not maintainable before the said learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sagar because the cause of action took place only at Jabalpur and Kolkata which was outside the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate at Sagar. A prayer was also made to quash the summons issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sagar.

3.      The applicants have submitted that it will be evident from the FIR that the complainant has alleged that she had been subjected to cruel treatment persistently at Jabalpur and also at Kolkata and incident taking place at Sagar  is not an isolated event, but consequential to the series of incidents taking place at Jabalpur.

"498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty. - Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

Explanation - For the purposes of this section "cruelty" means :

(a) Any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental or physical) of the woman or

(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand."

hence this revision petition is on following grounds;

a. the impugned order, if allowed to continue would ocsassion failure of justice

b. the learned trial court failed to exercise power vested under the leaw.

c. the impungned is perverse, malafide, not sustainble in law.

d. the learned trial erred in not only on the point of facts but on the point of Law.

e. the lerned trial Court did not consided the material facts availabel on the record. even the avrements made in the objection have not been dealt in their proper perspective.

PRYER

It is therefore most humbly and respectfully prayed that the impugned Judgement and Order dated 19.11.2005 passed by the  Learned Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, P. O.- Mr.          Sagar, in Criminal Case No. 300 / 2005 in the matter of the state of Madhya Pradesh v/s Ajeet Prakash & Ors. may kindly be quashed in the larger interst of justice with costs throughout.

SAGAR

DATED                          COUNSEL FOR APPLICANTS