Ali, J.- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite party. The opposite party who is the son of the petitioner No. 1 filed a complaint before the Magis­trate at Dimapur alleging inter alia that due to some diffe­rences between him and his father petitioner No. 1 over their family affairs, there was a meeting in their village over those differences and that in course of the discussion in the said meeting the complainant opposite party was severely assaulted by petitioner No. 1 and some others and that he was merci­lessly beaten and that an amount of his money was taken off in the assaults. He instituted the case before the Magistrate under section 332/350/379 and 380 IPC and process has been served against the accused persons including the petitioner. The incidents are alleged to have taken place in Hailakandi of Cachar District. The complainant further alleged that immed­iately after the occurrence stated above he sent to Dimapur where he suffered physically and mentally due to the aforesaid assault. 2. This petitioner has been filed for quashing the proceeding before the learned Magistrate on the ground that the place of occurrence having been at Hailakandi of Cacher District, the learned Magistrate of Dimapur has no jurisdiction to take cognisance of the offences stated in the complaint. But learned counsel for the opposite party referred to section 179 Cr.P.C. wherein it is provided that when an act is an offence by reason of anything which has been done and of a consequence which has ensued the offence may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such consequence has ensued. Relying on these provisions of this section, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that as the consequence of physical and mental suffering took place in Dimapur with the opposite party, the Magistrate at Dimapur has got judisriction to entertain the complaint. Relying on these provisions of this section, learned counsel for the opposite party submitted that as the consequence of physical and mental suffering took place in Dimapur with the opposite party, the Magistrate at Dimapur has got judisriction to entertain the complaint. But, I find myself unable to accept this view of the provisions of section 179 of the Cr.P.C. the reason being that the conse­quence of the act that has been referred to here is the consequence which amounts to an ingredient of the act of offence or a consequence which is a primary result of the act committed where the act itself makes out an offence and the consequence is a mere result which cannot be taken to have been essential for completing the offence, section 179 cannot apply. It app­lies in those cases only where the Act committed and the consequence are directly and inevitably connected with each other. In that view I do not accept the submission made by the learned counsel of the opposite party. I, therefore, find that the learned Magistrate, Dimapur has no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the case. The complaint ought to have been instituted before the Magistrate who had jurisd­iction over the place of occurrence, namely Hailakandi. The result of that the petition is allowed. The complaint petition of the opposite party will be forwarded by learned Magistrate, Dimapur to the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi before whom the complainant may appear within two weeks of the receipt of the complaint petition by the said Court. Learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate will examine the complainant afresh under section 200 Cr.P.C. and comply with other relevant provisions of Cr.P.C. The petition is allowed as above.