- (1.) The O.P. No. 2 tiled a maintenance case under Section 125. Cr.P.C. before the learned Judicial Magistrate at Siliguri which was registered as M.R. Case No. 63 of 2006. The present revisional application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the husband who was the O.P. in that ease questioning the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate to entertain that application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. on the ground that the wife has actually been residing at Chandernagore in the district of Hooghly. The petitioner's case is that he filed a Matrimonial Suit against the O.P./wife under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned District Judge, Darasat, 24-Parganas (N) and in that suit the wife appeared on the 11th Sep. 2006, and has been contesting the suit. In the Vokalatnarna in that suit she put her address as 21 Dr. S. P. Ghosh Road, Bagbazar (S), P.O. & P.S. Chandernagore, Dist- Hooghly. On receipt of the summons of the suit the wife lodged a criminal case on 13th of August 2006 under Section 498-A/354/406/ 120-B of the Indian Penal Code which was registered as Bidhan Nagar P.S. Case No. 74 dated 13th August, 2006 and in the said case the wife put her address as 21, Dr. S. P. Ghosh Road, Bagabazar (S). Chandernagore, Dist-Hooghly. Being a resident of Chandernagore in the district of Hooghly she filed a case under Section 125, Cr.P.C. before the A.C.J.M. at Siliguri falsely showing her to be a resident of Siliguri. Thus it is submitted that while the wife accepted the summons of the matrimonial suit at Chandernagore and filed Vokalatnama showing her address at Chandernagore and in the criminal case under Section 498A, I.P.C. she put her address of Chandernagore it is difficult to believe that she would be residing at Siliguri for the purpose of filing the maintenance case under Section 125, Cr.P.C.
(2.) The learned Magistrate rejected the contention of the petitioner by the order dated 19th June, 2007.
(3.) The question is whether the learned Magistrate at Siliguri has jurisdiction to try the suit at Siliguri. It has been submitted by the learned Advocate for the petitioner that ex facie it appears that the O.P./wife has falsely put her address in her application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. as a resident of Chaitanyapur under P.S. Miatigara in the district of Darjeeling. Learned Counsel for the O.P. submitted that the maintenance case was filed when the wife has been residing in the house of her father under P.S. Matigara. It is submitted that the marriage between the parties was solemnized at Chandernagore but the father of the wife who retired as a Probationary Officer has been residing at Chaitanyapur under P.S. Matigara and as the wife has been residing in the house of her father it cannot be said that the learned Magistrate of Siliguri has no jurisdiction to try the case or that a false address has been put in the cause title of the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. Mr. Milan Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing for the husband submitted that the matrimonial suit under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed at Barasat Court on 14th July, 2006 and the wife lodged criminal case under Section 498A, I.P.C. on 13th August, 2006 and it is impossible to believe that within a month thereafter the wife shifted to Siliguri to reside with her father at that place. Learned Advocate for the O.P./wife submitted that the maintenance case was the last case filed in September, 2006 while the matrimonial suit was filed by the husband in July, 2006 and criminal case was filed in August, 2006. It is submitted that matrimonial suit was filed by the husband before the Barasat Court as that was the matrimonial house of the parties and the wife cannot have say in the matter of territorial jurisdiction of the Court to hear the matrimonial dispute. Similarly, it is submitted that since the matrimonial home was under Barasat jurisdiction criminal case under Section 498A, I.P.C. alleging ill treatment and cruelty had to he instituted before the concerned police station under the district of 24-Paraganas (N), but the matter of the fact is that the wife has been residing in the house of her father at Matigara in the district of Darjeeting. Section 126 reads as follows :- "(1) Proceedings under Section 125 may be taken against any person in any district- a. Where he is. or b. Where he or his wife resides, or c. Where he last resided with his wife or as the case may be, with the mother of the illegitimate child.";