JUDGMENT 1. - This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the FIR No. 97/2006 registered at Mahila Thana, Jaipur (North) under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. 2. Brief facts giving rise to this misc. petition are that the respondent no. 2 Heena Kausar lodged a report on 18.9.2006 at the Mahila Thana, Jaipur (North) which was registered as FIR No. 97/2006 under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. The petitioners have filed this petition principally on the ground that the Mahila Thana. Jaipur (North) has no jurisdiction in the matter and, therefore, the FIR is liable to be quashed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned PR and learned counsel for the respondent no.2. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that no offence has been committed at Jaipur and no cause of action or part thereof has arisen at Jaipur and, therefore, Mahila Thane, Jaipur (North) has no jurisdiction in the matter. He has contended that the respondent no. 2 Heena Kausar after the marriage started to live with her husband the petitioner no. 1 Sameer Mohammad at Chittorgarh where all the acts of cruelty are alleged to have been committed and there is no allegation in the FIR that any act of cruelty has been committed at Jaipur. He has further contended that there is no allegation in the FIR that any article given in dowry at the time of marriage or thereafter was entrusted at Jaipur or any demand for return was made at Jaipur. According to him even if the entire contents of the FIR are taken to be true, the Mahila Thana, Jaipur (North) has no jurisdiction to register the case there. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 on the other hand asserts that the articles given in dowry were entrusted at Jaipur and the demand was also made at Jaipur and, therefore, the Mahila Thana, Jaipur (North) has jurisdiction in the matter. He places reliance on (2007)5 SCC 786 and 2007 Cr.L.J. 2972. 6. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 on the other hand asserts that the articles given in dowry were entrusted at Jaipur and the demand was also made at Jaipur and, therefore, the Mahila Thana, Jaipur (North) has jurisdiction in the matter. He places reliance on (2007)5 SCC 786 and 2007 Cr.L.J. 2972. 6. In order to appreciate the rival contentions, I deem it appropriate to reproduce the FIR which is as under- " fuosnu gS fd esjh 'kknh fnukad 16 flrEcj 2001 dks Jh lkehj eksgEen 'ks[k iq= Jh QSt eksgEen fuoklh izrki uxj fpRrkSM+x<+ ds lkFk fo|k/kj xkMZu t;iqj esa gqbZ Fkh esjs ikik us ejh 'kknh esaa vius lkeF;Z ls vf/kd yxHkx vkB yk[k :i;s llqjky okyksa dh ekax vuqlkj [kpZ fd;s Fks lkl] llqj] ifr o uunksa dks vyx&vyx migkj Lo:i tsoj fn;s FksA ftldh lwph eSa i`Fkd ls is'k dj nawxhA 'kknh ds ckn fonk gksdj llqjky xbZ FksA ftldh lwph eSa i`Fkd ls is'k dj nwaxhA 'kknh ds ckn fonk gksdj llqjky xbZ rks llqjky esa tkrs gh llqj us eq>s dgk lkeku ?kfV;k fn;k gS vkSj Vh0oh0 cq'k dEiuh dk fn;k gS ,y0th0 ugha fn;kA ;g dgdj rkus fn;s rFkk udn :i;s o ,y0th0Vh0oh0 dh ekax dh rc esjs ikik us fnlEcj 2001 dks ,y0th0Vh0oh0 o 10]000@& :i;s udn esjs lkl llqj dks ys tkdj fn;s mlds dqN fnu ckn eq>s esjs ifr lehj eksgEen lkl Jherh cn:fu'kk] uun 'kehuk lk;uk] pkpk llqj jbZl eksgEen vkSj pkpk lkl 'kehu o llqj Jh QSt eksgEen us vyx&vyx rjhds ls eq>s ekufld o 'kkjhfjd :i ls izrkfM+r djrs jgs o ngst esa udn 2]00]000@& :i;s o QzhMe eksVj lkbZfdy dh ekax dh eSaus esjs llqj ls dgk 'kknh esa cgqr [kpkZ gks x;k rFkk eksVj lkbZfdy ns nh gS rks llqj us dgk fd tcku pykrh gS vkSj esjs cky idM+dj fnokj esa /kDdk ekjk esjh lkl us daxkyksa dh csVh crkrs gq, pksVh idM+dj ?klhVkA ifr us esjs lkFk ykr ?kqlksa ls ekjihV dh rFkk uunksa us xkyh xyksp dh vkSj cqjk Hkyk dgk rFkk dgk fd rsjs cki ls 2 yk[k :i;s eaxok ugha rks tku ls ekj nsaxs vkSj esjs ls nks [kkyh LVkEi isijksa ij lkbZu djk fy;sA eSaus ikik dks Qksu djds crk;k rc ik;k us esjs [kkyw uokc ds gkFk 1]50]000 :i;s HkstsA eSaus 1]50]000@& :i;s esjh lkl o llqj esjs [kkyw ds lkeus lkl llqj dks fn;sA [kkyw ds vkus ds ckn llqj us dgk esa Fkkusnkj gwa dkuwu tkurk gwaA rFkk eq>s esjs llqj o pkpk llqj us dgk ge 24 ?k.Vs M~;wVh ij jgrs gSA gekjk dksbZ dqN ugha fcxkM+ ldrk gSA eSa llqjky okyksa ds pqipki lc tqYe lgu djrh jgh fd dHkh rks esjs vPNs fnu vk;saxsA ysfdu lkl eq>s [kkuk ugha nsrh Hkw[kk j[krh] dejs esa cUn dj nsrh] uunsa eq>s Vksjpj djrh jgrh] eSaus esjh eEeh] ikik HkkbZ o pkpk dks bl ckjs esa dbZ ckj i= fy[ksA rks esjs ?kj okyksa us dgk /khjs&/khjs lc lgh gks tk;sxk vkSj lHkh us esjs llqj dks le>k;k ysfdu ugha le>s vkSj eq>s xHkkZoLFkk esa ekjihV dj ihgj Hkst fn;kA 7 efgus ckn fnukad 10-10-2002 dks esjs t;iqj gkfLiVy esa fMysojh gqbZ ftldk iwjk [kpkZ esjs ikik us mBk;kA llqjky okyksa dks lwpuk nh ysfdu dksbZ feyus rd ugha vk;kA cPpk gksus ds dqN le; ckn esjs ifr vkdj eq>s ;g dgdj ys x;k fd Hkfo"; esa dHkh ijs'kku ugha d:axk uk esjs firkth ijs'kku djsaxs eSa ihgj pyh xbZ ysfdu dqN fnu ckn gh esjh lkl us dgk rsjs cki ls 50]000@& :i;s eaxok rFkk ifr us QzhMe eksVj lkbZfdy dh ekax dh] llqj us ekax iwjh djus ds fy, ncko MkykA rc fnukad 4-6-03 dks esjs ikik us 'kks:e ls eksVj lkbZfdy [kjhn dj esjs ifr dks nhA dqN fnu rd Bhd j[kkA mlds ckn ,d fnu esjh lkl o llqj us rFkk ekjihV dj ?kj ls fudkyu fn;k vkSj cl esa fcBk fn;kA eSa t;iqj vk xbZ djhc 9 efgus ls ihgj esa jg jgh gwaA eSaus ?kj cpkus dh dkQh dksf'k'k dhA esjs ikik llqjky okyksa dks le>kus ds fy, x;s fd ?kj [kjkc er djks ysfdu esjs llqj us ckr rd ugha dhA rc eSaus efgyk Fkkuk mRrj es ,d le>kbZ'k fjiksVZ is'k dh fd ftl ij Fkkus okyksa us llqj ifr dks cqyk;kA llqj ,d efgus dk le; ysdj x;k Fkk ysfdu Ms<+ efgus gks x;k uk rks vk;s gSa uk dksbZ ckr dhA eSa Qksu ij ifr ls ckr djrh gwa rks Qksu dkV nsrk gSA esjs ikik us esjs llqj ls ckr dh rks llqj us dgk esjs ikl VkbZe ugha gSA rqEgsa tks djuk gS tks djks rc eSaus esjk ngst lkeku ekaxk rks esjs llqjky okyksa us nsus ls euk dj fn;kA eq>s esjk ngst lkeku fnyok;k tk;s ,oa llqjky okyksa ds f[kykQ dk;Zokgh dh tkosA " 7. Section 177 Cr.P.C. says that every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. Section 181 (4) Cr.PC. says that any offence of criminal misappropriation or of criminal breach of trust may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction the offence was committed or any part of the property which is the subject of the offence was received or retained or was required to be returned or accounted for by the accused person. 8. As regards the offence under Section 498A IPC there is absolutely no allegation in the FIR that the petitioners committed any act of cruelty at Jaipur.As regards the offence under Section 406 IPC from the perusal of the FIR it becomes clear that there is no allegation that any article given in dowry at the time of the marriage was entrusted to any of the petitioners at Jaipur. There is of course a reference of ornaments given as gift but neither these ornaments can be considered to be articles given in dowry nor there is any entrustment. There is also an allegation of giving L.G. TV, motor cycle and Rs. 1,50,0001- but none of these articles is alleged to have been given or entrusted at Jaipur. There is no allegation in the FIR that the above articles were retained or were required to be returned at Jaipur. 9. In this case no offence has been committed at Jaipur and no property which is the subject matter of the offence has been received or retained or has been required to be returned at Jaipur. It is thus clear that no cause of action or part thereof has arisen at Jaipur. 10. In the light of the above discussions I am clearly of the view that since no offence has been committed at Jaipur and since no cause of action or part thereof has arisen at Jaipur, therefore, the Mahila Thana, Jaipur (North) has no jurisdiction and in such a situation the FIR deserves to be quashed. 11. Consequently, the misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No. 97/2006 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur (North) is hereby quashed. *******