1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-petitioner as also learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 and learned Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This misc. petition has been preferred with a prayer to quash and set-aside the order dated 06.02.2017 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.18, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, whereby he proceeded to frame charge for the offence under Sections 498A and 406 IPC against the accused-petitioner. On preferring a criminal revision against the said order, it also came to be rejected vide order dated 14.07.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Women Atrocities Cases No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur. Prayer has been made to quash and set-aside the said order dated 14.07.2017 also.

3. Facts in brief, relevant for consideration of this misc. petition are that FIR No.55/2014 came to be registered on the basis of complaint filed by Smt. Dharamveer Kaur against her husband Daljeet Singh and other family members of husband, wherein it was stated inter-alia that after getting divorce from her first husband in the year 2009, complainant remarried to Daljeet Singh on 03.08.2013. Amount of Rs.10 lakhs, silver & gold ornaments and other items as per list enclosed were given in the dowry by the parents of the complainant. But just after some time of marriage, accused-persons started treating the complainant with cruelty to pursue the demand of dowry. They harassed her, did not give her proper food, did not get her treated on falling ill and started teasing and taunting her for less quantity of dowry. Demand for Rs.10 lakhs in cash and a car was raised by them to let her stay peacefully her in-laws’ house. It has further been stated that all the accused-persons raised their demand of dowry after coming to the house of father of complainant situated at Jaipur. When she was driven out of the house after being beaten, she reached her parents house at Jaipur. Accused even reached there for demand of dowry. All the dowry articles given to her at the time of marriage including ornaments, are in possession of the accused-persons.

4. After investigation, charge-sheet for the offence under Sections 498A and 406 IPC was filed. After hearing the charge arguments, learned trial court proceeded to frame charge for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC against accused Daljeet Singh. When Daljeet Singh preferred a criminal revision against the said order dated 06.02.2017, it was also rejected by the revisional court vide order dated 14.07.2017.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner contends that the orders dated 06.02.2017 and 14.07.2017 passed by the learned courts below are illegal and deserve to be quashed and set-aside.

6. Preliminary plea raised in this regard is that the trial court was not having territorial jurisdiction and thus, the order passed by it is illegal. Counsel contends that all the alleged incidents of physical and mental cruelty are said to have taken place at Jodhpur and the complaint has been wrongly filed showing the jurisdiction at Jaipur. To support his contention, he has placed reliance on the following judgments :-

(I)- Harmanpreet Singh Ahluwalia & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., reported in 2009(7) SCC 712.

(II)- Bhura Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., reported in 2008(11) SCC 103.

(III)- Manish Ratan & Ors. Vs. State of M.P. & Anr., reported in 2007(1) SCC 262.

(IV)- Pankaj Saxena & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2008(1) Cri.L.R. 64.

7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant as also learned Public Prosecutor contends that the incidents of cruelty and demand of dowry took place not only at her in-laws’ house at Jodhpur but the accused-persons came to Jaipur also where the parental house of the complainant is situated and raised the demand of dowry. This fact has been specifically mentioned in para 5, 6 & 8 of the complainant filed by Dharamveer Kaur. On perusal of complaint, it is