Does CrPC-161 statement of witness create jurisdiction

engineer

Hi All,

 

Does CrPC-161 statement of the witness of a criminal case is considered while deciding the jurisdiction of the criminal case depite similar statement is not made by the complainant and any of ther witnesses of the criminal case. 

 

I have seens many Hon'ble Supreme Court of India judgements where only FIR and CrPC-161 statement of the complainant is  considered while deciding the jurisdiction of the criminal case.

 

If one witness makes an allegation which is not even made by the complainant and other witnesses of the case, will court convict the accused based on the sole alone witness statement .... 

 
Reply   
 
engineer

Forgot to mention that the statement made by the witness which is not made by the complainant and other witnesses, refering the above post, is droped from charge sheet in that criminal case. Please condider this point while answering for the post ....

 
Reply   
 


Legal Adviser

Mr. Shiv,

According to me your Homework is incomplete. First decide What to ask ?

be specific. Best luck.

 
Reply   
 
engineer

Dear Ayub,

 

My question:

 

While Court checking for jurisdiction of the criminal case for trial, should it consider the CrCP-161 statements of the witnesses.

 

I am dealing with one case in which opposite lawyer is saying that in the CrCP-161 statement of the witness says that offence happened at place-A and this kind statement is not made by the complainant and other witnesses ofthe case and eventually dropped from the charge sheet. Whereas opposite lawyer saying that it was mistake to drop the allegation by the police from Charge sheet.

 

I read many judgements in which Hon'ble High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court transfered the FIRs and PCRs to the another jurisdiction considerng the complainant allegations occurance place.

 

What is correct ...?

 
Reply   
 

What is the offence complained of? has it to do something with domestic relations?

 
Reply   
 
engineer

Hello sir,

 

As per defacto complainant and her parents husband use to visit their house at Place-A once in 15 days and on one day husband asked wife to join him and accordingly joined. Wife and her parents lived together at their house at Place-A.

 

Whereas the brother of the wife made statement that husband use to visit wife place-A once in 15 days and every time husband harassed wife and beaten wife to seell her property. Wife brother was living seperately from his parents and he did not disclose how he came to know about this incident.

 

ALso wife filed affidavits in varous cases and did not said that huband visited wife place-A and harassed her. Also did not say that allegatios happened at Place-A.

 

In this scenarion can Place-A has jurisdiction to tril the case?

 
Reply   
 

Yes, court having jurisdiction over  Place-A can have jurisdiction to try the case, basing on the 161 statements of the defacto complainant and others. even otherwise the wife can claim that she is experiencing the mental agony out of the said incident at Place -A and confer jurisdiction to the said case. This is specially seen in 125 Cr.P.C. cases.

 
Reply   
 
engineer

Dear Rajeswar Rao.

 

I think you completely misundertood the circumstances.

In the case we are discussing, wife did not tell either in her FIR or CrPC-161 statement that allegation happened at Place-A. Moreover the present case is not the CrPC-125 it is 498A IPC.

 

While complainnat is not telling that incident happened and if one of the witness says that incident happned can't we come to a conclusion that think witness is lying...

 

So far various High Court's and Supreme Court held transfer of Crminal cases to the concern jurisdcitional courts based on FIR allegatiosn and also PCR allegations alone.

 

 Can we make out in this that only complainant statements are considered to decide jurisdiction of offence.

Am I correct?

 

As you said offence happened at Place-A and wife is suffering at Place-B then Plcae-B attract jurisdiction is complately fase for this see the judgement: Manish Ratan and Ors. Vs State of M.P and Anr. Reported in 2007 volume-1 SCC 262.

 
Reply   
 
Advocate

u have to challenge jurisdiction of FIR and u can use below judgment in your support.

u can take plea that lacuna can't be covered by recording supplementary statemant. u can use "deepa bajwa" judgment of delhi high court in this regard.



Attached File : 28 28 improvement in fir using 161 statements.pdf downloaded 130 times
 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

Search Forum:








web analytics