The Orissa High Court has emphasized that a complaint under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code may be lodged at the location of residence of the woman who has left or been forced to leave the matrimonial home due to cruelty. The court designated the charge as a ‘continuing offense’ and made these observations in a ruling by a Single Judge Bench, presided over by Justice Gourishankar Satapathy.
“…the physical acts of cruelty has definite consequence on mental faculty of the victim of torture. Hence, the physical cruelty meted to the wife at her matrimonial home would have an adverse impact and effects on the mental health of the wife at her parental home, especially when the offence U/S. 498-A of IPC is a continuing offence and torture as meted to wife at different place would also torture the wife mentally for a longer period.”
“The husband and in-laws of the complainant petitioned the High Court with a request to dismiss the order of cognizance issued against them for violating Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Additionally, they sought to terminate the ongoing criminal proceedings against them for their alleged mistreatment of the complainant.
The petitioners argued that the incidents mentioned in the FIR had occurred in a place outside the jurisdiction of the court. Hence, they claimed that considering the FIR would be an abuse of court proceedings due to the lack of jurisdiction. To support their argument, the petitioners cited the decisions of the Supreme Court in the cases of Manish Ratan & others v. State of M.P. & Anr. and Manoj Kumar Sharma & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Anr.”
The State, on the other hand, relied on the ruling in Rupali Devi v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. to argue that as the allegations of mistreatment by the petitioners at the matrimonial home resulted in mental abuse at the current place of residence of the victim, it would not be considered a lack of jurisdiction to entertain the related FIR at that location.
“The adverse effects on the mental health in the parental home though on account of the acts committed in the matrimonial home would, in our considered view, amount to commission of cruelty within the meaning of Section 498- A at the parental home. The consequences of the cruelty committed at the matrimonial home results in repeated offences being committed at the parental home.”
The Supreme Court had determined that the court located at the place where the wife has sought shelter after leaving or being forced to leave the matrimonial home due to acts of cruelty by the husband or his relatives would have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint accusing the commission of offenses under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
In the case at hand, the Court noted that the FIR revealed allegations of prima facie mental abuse at the complainant’s parental home. The complainant reported to the police that she was being subjected to torture by her husband, mother-in-law, and sister-in-law, and that she could no longer endure it.
Furthermore, the allegations against the husband-petitioner of sending marriage proposals to different girls through SMS satisfied the Court that the complainant had suffered mental abuse, which could have taken place while she was residing in her parental home.
As a result, the Court dismissed the petition, finding that the court located at the complainant’s parental home had jurisdiction to entertain the case under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
Case Title: Smt. Geeta Tiwari & Anr. v. State of Orissa & Anr.
Case No.: CRLMC No. 2596 of 2015
Judgment Dated: 16th January 2023
Coram: G. Satapathy, J.
Counsel for the Petitioners: Ms. D. Moharana, Advocate
Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. S.S. Pradhan, Addl. Govt. Advocate for the State; Mr. B.C. Moharana, Advocate for the O.P. No. 2
