MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |    

Jurisdiction in Cases of Continued Mental Cruelty at Parental Home Affirmed: MP High Court Transfers Dowry Case to Jabalpur Citing Mental Trauma Persists

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, in a significant judgment, addressed the critical issue of jurisdiction in cases involving continued mental cruelty at the parental home of the victim. Justice Raj Mohan Singh, while adjudicating a petition for transferring a dowry-related case, held that the jurisdiction lies with the court where mental trauma and psychological distress continue, applying Section 179 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Smt. Jahnvi Tripathi filed a writ petition for transferring the investigation and trial of her FIR, alleging dowry demands, physical abuse, and mental cruelty by her husband and in-laws, from Bhopal to Jabalpur. The petitioner argued that although physical abuse occurred in Bengaluru and Bhopal, the mental cruelty continued at her parental home in Jabalpur.

Justice Raj Mohan Singh observed, "Mental cruelty borne out of physical cruelty or abusive and humiliating verbal exchanges would continue in the parental home even though there may not be any overt act of physical cruelty at such place." Citing the Supreme Court judgments in 'Ruhi Vs. Anees Ahmed' and 'Rupali Devi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh', the Court affirmed that the effects of mental cruelty in the parental home are a continuation of the offence under Section 498-A IPC, thus falling under the jurisdiction of the place where such consequences ensue.

The Court further rejected the objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, stating that at the time of its filing, no alternative remedy under Section 407 Cr.P.C. was available, and the unilateral transfer of investigation by the Bhopal police was without jurisdiction.

Decision: The Court accepted the writ petition, holding the transfer of investigation from Jabalpur to Bhopal as illegal and directing the trial to be conducted in Jabalpur, considering the continued mental trauma experienced by the petitioner at her parental home.

Date of Decision: 5th March 2024.

Smt. Jahnvi Tripathi (Dubey) vs State of Madhya Pradesh & Others,

Similar News