ORDER : Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. Petitioner has preferred this misc. petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.39/2017 dated 04.05.2017 police Station Mahila Thana, Churu for the offence under Sections 498-A, 406 of IPC. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the judgment of Rajesh Sharma & Ors. v. State of U.P. & Anr., decided on 27.07.2017 in Criminal Appeal No.1265 of 2017, in which the following directions have been given, which reads as under :- "19. Thus, after careful consideration of the whole issue, we consider it fit to give following directions :- (i) (a) In every district one or more Family Welfare Committees be constituted by the District Legal Services Authorities preferably comprising of three members. The constitution and working of such committees may be reviewed from time to time and at least once in a year by the District and Sessions Judge of the district who is also the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority. (b) The Committees may be constituted out of para legal volunteers/social workers/ retired persons/wives of working officers/other citizens who may be found suitable and willing. (c) The Committee members will not be called as witnesses. (d) Every complaint under Section 498A received by the police or the Magistrate be referred to and looked into by such committee. Such committee may have interaction with the parties personally or by means of telephone or any other mode of communication including electronic communication. (e) Report of such committee be given to the Authority by whom the complaint is referred to it latest within one month from the date of receipt of complaint. (f) The committee may give its brief report about the factual aspects and its opinion in the matter. (g) Till report of the committee is received, no arrest should normally be effected. (h) The report may be then considered by the Investigating Officer or the Magistrate on its own merit. (i) Members of the committee may be given such basic minimum training as may be considered necessary by the Legal Services Authority from time to time. (j) The Members of the committee may be given such honorarium as may be considered viable. (k) It will be open to the District and Sessions Judge to utilize the cost fund wherever considered necessary and proper. (j) The Members of the committee may be given such honorarium as may be considered viable. (k) It will be open to the District and Sessions Judge to utilize the cost fund wherever considered necessary and proper. (ii) Complaints under Section 498A and other connected offences may be investigated only by a designated Investigating Officer of the area. Such designations may be made within one month from today. Such designated officer may be required to undergo training for such duration (not less than one week) as may be considered appropriate. The training may be completed within four months from today; (iii) In cases where a settlement is reached, it will be open to the District and Sessions Judge or any other senior Judicial Officer nominated by him in the district to dispose of the proceedings including closing of the criminal case if dispute primarily relates to matrimonial discord; (iv) If a bail application is filed with at least one clear day's notice to the Public Prosecutor/complainant, the same may be decided as far as possible on the same day. Recovery of disputed dowry items may not by itself be a ground for denial of bail if maintenance or other rights of wife/minor children can otherwise be protected. Needless to say that in dealing with bail matters, individual roles, prima facie truth of the allegations, requirement of further arrest/custody and interest of justice must be carefully weighed; (v) In respect of persons ordinarily residing out of India impounding of passports or issuance of Red Corner Notice should not be a routine; (vi) It will be open to the District Judge or a designated senior judicial officer nominated by the District Judge to club all connected cases between the parties arising out of matrimonial disputes so that a holistic view is taken by the Court to whom all such cases are entrusted; and (vii) Personal appearance of all family members and particularly outstation members may not be required and the trial court ought to grant exemption from personal appearance or permit appearance by video conferencing without adversely affecting progress of the trial. (viii) These directions will not apply to the offences involving tangible physical injuries or death." 3. (viii) These directions will not apply to the offences involving tangible physical injuries or death." 3. Learned Public Prosecutor however, submitted that though the word of caution regarding the matrimonial cases have been given by the Hon'ble Apex Court but the facts of the case are such that during investigation the prima facie case of the offence to be constituted under Sections 498-A, 406 of the IPC are made out against the petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.2. The status report furnished by the learned Public Prosecutor also reflects that there is consistency in the allegations levelled by the complainant. 4. The petitioner has also raised the issue of jurisdiction pertaining to the Churu District to which learned Public Prosecutor has stated that even once single incident in the territory concerned was sufficient to attract the jurisdiction. The Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is limited jurisdiction and unless on the strict parameters of Bhajan Lal which is a cardinal precedent law to be exercised interference only when called for by this Court under the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. 5. In light of the aforementioned facts, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the present FIR, hence, the same is dismissed.