The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 08.10.2012 passed in Complaint Case No. 1545 (C) of 2012 by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran, whereby cognizance has been taken for the offences under Section 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and processes have been ordered to be issued against the accused petitioners for facing trial.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has raised a very short question regarding lack of territorial jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate. According to him, as per Complaint petition vide Annexure-1 itself, the occurrence in question has taken place either at Darbhanga or at Mumbai and no cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran. Therefore, according to him, the order taking cognizance is not sustainable in law.

3. It is well settled that question of jurisdiction has to be raised at the first instance before the learned trial court itself and is required to be tested after looking into the materials available on record. Reference can be made to a