9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 578X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 471(A) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code lodged in Police Station Haweli, District Ahmedabad and other incidental reliefs in connection thereto. 2. Admittedly the petitioner/s is/are neither named in the first information report (hereinafter called as 'F.I.R.') nor in any of the subsequent documents thereto which gives the primary cause of action for making such writ petition/s. The sole contention of the petitioner/s is that a notice under Section 160 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter in short called as 'Cr.P.C.') was served upon him/them within the State of Uttar Pradesh, therefore, they are entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of this High Court for the purpose of appropriate relief/s. 3. Factually, there is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re attendance of witnesses.--(1) Any police officer making an investigation under this Chapter may, by order in writing, require the attendance before himself of any person being within the limits of his own or any adjoining station who, from the information given or otherwise, appears to be acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case; and such person shall attend as so required: Provided that no male person under the age of fifteen years or woman shall be required to attend at any place other than the place in which such male person or woman resides. (2) The State Government may, by rules made in this behalf, provide for the payment by the police officer of the reasonable expenses of every person, attending under Sub-sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can not give the jurisdiction of this Court to interfere with the offence committed outside. Moreover, happening to some one in other case can not be the basis of the jurisdiction in the present case. 6. All the points were kept open from the beginning. At the time of obtaining the interim order, in an earlier occasion, the petitioner/s cited a judgment reported in MANU/SC/0549/2000 : AIR2000SC2966 (Navinchandra N. Majithia v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.) to establish that territorial jurisdiction of the High Court, even in the case of criminal cases, will be applicable by virtue of Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India irrespective of seat of the Government. According to us, such proposition is applicable when part of the cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
