IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Cr.Misc. No.24609 of 2011
Rekha Kumari
Versus
The State Of Bihar & Ors
-----------
2/ 26.7.2011 The restoration petition has been put up with the main
SLA No. 71 of 2010.
SLA is restored to its original number and file.
Heard learned counsel for the parties upon the application
seeking special leave of this Court to appeal against the judgment of
acquittal passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Hilsa in Complaint Case no. 703 C of 2004 / Tr. No. 1037 of 2010
by which, while convicting the accused Ashwini Chandra, the
learned trial court acquitted the four accused persons, who are
respondent nos. 2 to 5. I have gone through the judgment and found
that while considering the evidence on record, the learned trial court
applied his judicial mind properly and has marshaled the facts
correctly. One observation of the learned trial judge appears
erroneous but that could not go to the root of the matter as the
leaned trial court has not acquitted the respondents on that ground.
The SDJM has held that the occurrence appeared taking place both
at Bokaro and Preman Bigaha and there was no complaint filed for
the part of the occurrence at Bokaro.
Learned trial judge is probably missing the provision of
section 179 Cr.P.C. which relates to the cause and effect of an
offence, especially when the offence appears a continuing one. The
2
Supreme Court has now held that an offence under section 498A
IPC is a continuing offence and its cause might have taken place at
one place but the effect might have ensued at the other place in two
different jurisdictions and the complaint could be filed in either of
the two jurisdictions. As such, non filing of the complaint at Bokaro
appears of no consequence.
After having considered the judgment of acquittal, I do
not find any perversity in the same the application seeking special
leave to appeal is dismissed.
Anil/ ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)