LIVE Online Course on NDPS by Riva Pocha and Adv. Taraq Sayed. Starting from 24th May. Register Now!!
The Indian Constitution Courses

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Kiran Kumar (Employee)     28 April 2010

Question on Jurisdiction


My brother's wife filed a 498a and 3,4 of DP Act 9 months back. Here is the brief information on the background.

My brother got married in the year 2008 Nalgonda District, AP and settled in Hyderabad immediately after marriage. After 6 months of marriage due to mental imbalance and of no reason, his wife filed a case in Nalgonda (where marriage was performed) inspite of both being stayed in Hyderabad and bBoth of them are employees in Hyderabad, Case was registered in nalgonda to harras us and joined hands with police. Somehow we could able to get bails/interim stay of arrest from High Court, AP.

Does this circumstance attarct jurisdiction issue ? . Even in complaint by his wife, none of the events have occured in Nalgonda. What should we do to trasfer the case to Hyderabad so that we can reduce their harrassment at Nalgonda. This is a very very clear case of 498a misuse. Kindly refer any judgements where the case is transferred on jurisdiction basis.


Thanks in advance.


 9 Replies

adv. rajeev ( rajoo ) (practicing advocate)     28 April 2010

Dear KiranKumar.

On behlaf of my client I am contesting the case filoed u/s 498 A and more particularly about Domestic Violence Act. on the ground of jurisdiction.

Rule t5 of the DV act is very clear :  ( 1) Upon receipt of a complaint of doemstic violence, the protection officer shall prepare a doemstic indicent report in Form 1 and submit the same to the Magistrate and forward copies there of the police office in charge of the police station withithin the local limits of jurisdiction of which the doemstic violence alleged to have been committed has taken place and to the serivce providers in that area.

(2) upon a request of any aggrieved person, a serivce provider may record a doemstic indicent report in Form I and forward a copy there of to the Magistrate and the protection officer having jurisdiction in the area where the doemstiv violence is alleged to have taken place.

According to you the alleged doemstic violence has taken place at Hyderabad  where ur brother and his wife were working.

The service provider of Hyderabad had  to record the indicent report and forwarded the copy there to the magistrate and the protection officer having juriswdiction .

So in my opinon whatever report submitted by the service provider of Hyderabad it self beyond the jurisdiction of that service provider.  On this point you contest the case.

Kiran Kumar (Lawyer)     28 April 2010

yes the present case does invite jurisdiction issue.


FIR under S.498-A can be at a place where the offence has been committed, there is certainly a judgment by SC in the year 2009, pls visit your lawyer for details.

Kiran Kumar (Employee)     28 April 2010

Thanks Kiran,

Can you kindly throw some details on SC judgement of yr 2009 on Jurisdiction ? Also, the chrage sheet is not yet filed even after 9 months of FIR, is it a wise decison to approach higher police officials in Nalgonda with an application(Attaching SC orders) to transfer the case from nalgonda Police Station to Hyderabad?


If the allegations mentioned in FIR have not happened in Nalgonda, as per the complainant, then Nalgonda does not have jurisdiction under S.498-A.  Then, you have to move High Court for transfer of petition from Nalgonda District to Hyderabad city.

Munirathnam (Scientist)     13 May 2010


Below explanation would help you... 

1.     Humbly submit, plain reading of charge sheet reveals that defacto complainant, complainant herein, lived with applicant/petitioner (A1) at their matrimonial home in Bangalore City, Karnataka Sate and no part of the alleged allegations happened in Hyderabad, Andra Pradesh State.  Further submit that as per charge sheet, alleged allegations happened in Karnataka State only and during the investigation, even without visiting the crime place, proof is enclosed as P-EX-1, i.e., Bangalore City, respondent completed investigation in Andra Pradesh State and filed the charge sheet in this Hon’ble Court. The criminal proceedings in CC.No.1280/2008 on the file of this Hon’ble Court are abusing the process of law by non-complying with the sections 177 to 181 and 156 of criminal procedure codes (CrPC) and the charge sheet is not maintainable as described below:
a.     As per section 177 of CrPC, the criminal case can be tried only, where cause of action arose and in the present case, as per the charge sheet and as per the complainant the cause of action arose only in Bangalore City i.e., at the matrimonial home of the complainant at Bangalore City, Karnataka State, hence this Hon’ble court has no jurisdiction to try this case, where it is pending. Further submit that it is admitted version of the complainant in her affidavits submitted in MC.No.145/2009, on the file of Hon’ble Family Court, L.B. Nagar, R.R. District and in Transfer Petition No.5/2010, on the file of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that both the applicant and the complainant lived only at Bangalore and further submit that the petitioner did not claim that both lived anywhere other than Bangalore City, hence only Bangalore City courts has jurisdiction to try this case.  Hence pray this Hon’ble Court to discharge the petitioner on this sole ground. Applicant put reliance on the below list of judgments from Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in support of this ground. 
                                                                         i.      Manish Ratan and Ors. Vs State of M.P and Anr. Reported in 2007 volume-1 SCC 262.
                                                                       ii.      Y. Abraham Ajith and Others Vs. Inspector of Police, Chennai and Another reported in 2004, SCC Crl-2134.
                                                                    iii.      Satvinder Kaur vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (1999) 8 SCC 728
                                                                      iv.      Bhanu Ram and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan 7 Anr in CASE NO: Appeal (crl.) 587 of 2008 [arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 79 of 2006).
                                                                        v.      Sonu and Ors Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. in W.P (Crl.). No.1266/2007, Decision on 10.10.2007.
b.     As per section 156 of CrPC, police has the power to investigate any cognizable case, which a court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such station would have power to inquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XIII. Section 156 CrPC read as:
Section 156 of CrPC: Police officer's power to investigate cognizable cases:
1)     Any officer in charge of a police station may, without the order of a Magistrate, investigate any cognizable case which a court having jurisdiction over the local area within the limits of such station would have power to enquire into or try under the provisions of Chapter XIII.
2)     No proceedings of a police officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on the ground that the case was one, which such officer was not empowered under this section to investigate.
3)     Any Magistrate empowered under section 190 may order such an investigation as above mentioned.
In present case, plain reading of the charge sheet reveals that alleged allegations were not happened within the territorial jurisdictional limits of kukatpally police station and also provide information that alleged offence happened in the jurisdiction of Bangalore City only. Whereas the kukatpally police furnished the false information in the charge sheet by saying that offence happened in their police station limits and investigated the case in their jurisdiction and filed the charge sheet in this Hon’ble Court, is contrary to the provisions of the section 156 of CrPC and charge sheet is not maintainable in law. Applicant put reliance on the below list of judgments from Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in support of this ground.
                                                                         i.      Satvinder Kaur vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (1999) 8 SCC 728
                                                                       ii.      Sonu and Ors Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. in W.P (Crl.). No.1266/2007, Decision on 10.10.2007.
c.      Kukatpally police failed to transfer the FIR to the concern police station having the jurisdiction for investigation as per the law. Further submit that in the case of Satvinder Kaur Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) (1999) 8 SCC 728, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India observed that Section 170 Cr.P.C specifically provides that if, upon investigation, it appears to the Officers In-charge of the Police Station that crime was not committed within the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station, that FIR can be forwarded to the Police Stating having jurisdiction over the area in which crime is committed.
d.     Respondent furnished false information in the charge sheet, Para-1, saying alleged allegations happened at Hyderabad whereas the plain reading of the charge sheet reveals that no part of the alleged allegation happened in Hyderabad.  
2.     Further submit the proceedings of the case in this Hon’ble Court without having jurisdiction would result in miss carriage of justice as described below:
a.     Respondent did not investigate the case at its alleged occurrence place, i.e., Bangalore City, Karnataka State.
b.     The respondent failed to collect possible eye-witnesses statements and the evidence in support of either complainant or applicant which exists only at Bangalore City.
c.      The evidence in support of the accused exists at Bangalore City and police failed to visit crime alleged place and collect the evidences which may destroy upon failing to collect in time.
d.     The supporting witnesses for either complainant or petitioner/applicant, includes women, are residents of Bangalore City and applicant is also resident of Bangalore City. Either the applicant or his supporting witnesses does not have any relatives or friends in this area and have threat from the complainant side people.
e.     The accused side witnesses may not prefer to travel 700KM that to another state jurisdiction would result in great inconvenience to defend the criminal case and would result in miss carriage of justice.
f.       Further submit that accused and their supporting witnesses have life threat in this jurisdiction and would cause great inconvenience to defend the case in this jurisdiction.
1 Like

Kiran Kumar (Employee)     23 May 2010

Hello Prabhakar Garu,


There is Sec 3 & 4 of DP ACT with 498a. Will the transfer of case still be possible?



Hiten (Executive)     03 February 2013

Please advice,

  my wife stayed witn me in Gurgaon after marriage.  she have filed DV and 498 and 125 in Jabalpur ( MP)

  Is there any judgement which can i use in as juridication matter in Jabalpur court , for transfer case or queshing.



ashoksrivastava (scientist)     03 February 2013

dear hiten its advisable to start your own thread

coming to your question

dv can be filed wherever aggrieved is temporarily or permanantly residing at the time of filing dv


"The Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005,



27. Jurisdiction.—


(1) The court of Judicial Magistrate of the first class or the Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be, within the local limits of which—


(a) the person aggrieved permanently or temporarily resides or carries on business or is employed; or


(b) the respondent resides or carries on business or is employed; or


(c) the cause of action has arisen,


shall be the competent court to grant a protection order and other orders under this Act and to try offences under this Act.


(2) Any order made this Act shall be enforceable throughout India.





In all probability she must have got the 498a complaint prepared by some lawyer using any visit by you to jabalpur anytime within past 3 years. As an example she might have mentioned in complaint that when you visited jabalpur sometime within last 3 years you demanded dowry and assaulted her in jabalpur.if luckily you have never been there in last 3years she might have alleged that you have thrown her out of house saying she should not return without dowry. when she or her parents contacted you over telephone from jabalpur you threatened them  with dire consequences if demand is not met. so your cruelty has continued in jabalpur thereby creating jurisdiction there in view of crpc 178c.

it seems you have not seen fir yet.  hire a  very competent  even if costlysessions court lawyer in jabalpur.Only after getting certified copy of fir he will be able to help you. remember.a lot of research is needed to get a honest and competent lawyer. half the case is won if you succeed here.I FEEL THIS IS THE MOST DIFFICULT THING IN 498A SITUATION.Allthe best

Hiten (Executive)     05 February 2013

Hi Sir,

 Thanks for your help.

   i am going to jabalpur on every date with my lawyer from my city. We have hired one lawyer in jabalpur , just for taking date and some paper work. we can not relay upon lawyer of jabalpur. because my wife's brother is also a lawyer and practicing in jabalpur only.

 Though he is not fighting case of his sister( Mrs 498a) . They have hired 2 lawyer of jabalpur high court.

on last month in DV case we told the judge that this marriage is Null and void , because mrs 498 was already married with one person and living separate without divorce . Then judge said then too i have to pay maintance to wife and my 1 year old son.

Supreme court has transfer my divorce case from my home town ( kota ) to bhopal in October with this order that bhopal court has to give decision in 2 months. But file moved from bhopal to kota in December 2012. and on 30 January 2013 bhopal family court has transfer file from family court to ADJ in bhopal and we have given date of 27 Feb 2012.

We have to give application of amendment of divorce case to be declare Null and Void. ( As we came to know these facts after filing Divorce case in Kota in April 2012,

Mrs 498 was wanted to transfer divorce case from kota to jabalpur.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  

Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query