- (1.) THE first information report lodged under Sections 498 A, 406 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, is being sought to be quashed on the ground that it is hit by Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, none of the cause of action ever accrued at Dhanbad, where the complaint was lodged, which was sent before the concerned police station under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. In this regard, it was submitted that whatever overt act, constituting offence u/s 498 A of the Indian Penal Code have been alleged to have been committed, those have been committed at Orissa.
(2.) IT was further pointed out that so far as allegation with respect to Dowry Prohibition Act is concerned, it is not clear as to where demand was made and so far as this petitioner is concerned, neither he has been alleged to have done any overt act so as to constitute any offence under Sections /4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act or under Section 498 A of the Indian Penal Code and, therefore, the first information report is fit to be quashed. 3. In respect of this, learned counsel has referred to the decisions rendered in a case of "Bhura Ramversus State of Rajasthan [(2008) 11 SCC 103]" and also in a case of "Y.Abraham Ajithversus Inspector of Police [(2004) 8 SCC 100]."
(3.) SO far as the matter relating to jurisdiction is concerned, it has come that when the demand of dowry was made, amount was deposited in Bank of India at Amlaghat Branch, which situates within the jurisdiction of Dhanbad, where the case has been lodged.;