9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 1036X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endra Rajak also filed a complaint in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur against Dr. Binod Kumar and four others, alleging the commission of offence against those five persons under Sections 304B, 498A, 120B and 406 IPC. The complainant, Surendra Rajak, was the father of the deceased Kalpana and in the Complaint Petition, he narrated the chain of events starting from 9th of June, 1994, the date on which Kalpana was married to Binod Kumar till 12.6.1997, the date on which the father received a telephonic message that Kalpana had received burn injuries, while preparing milk for Kalpana's daughter and ultimately Kalpana died on 20thof June, 1997. As the Police did not proceed with the investigation in right earnest, Surendra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 304B IPC. 4. Mr. P.S.Mishra, the learned senior counsel, appearing for the accused persons contended that under Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, an offence could be inquired and tried by the Court in whose local jurisdiction, it was committed and consequently on the basis of allegations made in the F.I.R. as well as the complaint filed, the incident constituting the alleged offence under Section 304B being at Jahanaganj (Azamgarh) in the state of Uttar Pradesh, the Magistrate at Bhagalpur in the State of Bihar will not have territorial jurisdiction to try the offence. Mr. Mishra also further contended that on the basis of allegations made, no offence under Section 406 IPC can be said to have been constituted. On ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and (Banwari Lal Jhunjhunwala and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Anr. 1963 Supp.(2) SCR,338).) Even the Law Commission in its 41st Report had observed that the general rule laid down in Section 177 is neither exclusive nor peremptory. The learned Single Judge while dismissing the contention raised by the accused has relied upon Section 220 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and considering the narration of events culminating in the death of Kalpana, which constitutes offence under Section 304B of the IPC, the learned Single Judge has come to a conclusion that there appears to exist a continuity of action to attract Sub-section(1) of section 220, and therefore, it cannot be said that the jurisdiction of the Magistrate at Bhagalpur is ousted to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion for the purpose of determining whether two or more acts constitute the same transaction. But the circumstances of a given case indicating proximity of time, unity or proximity of place, continuity of action and community of purpose or design are the factors for deciding whether certain acts form parts of the same transaction or not. Therefore a series of acts whether are so connected together as to form the same transaction is purely a question of fact to be decided on the aforesaid criteria. Bearing in mind the aforesaid principles and on scrutiny of the narration of events in the F.I.R. as well as the complaint, we do not find any infirmity with the conclusion of the High Court in applying Section 220 of the Criminal Procedure Code to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
