ORDER

1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that jurisdiction has been denied by learned revisional court on the ground that the cause of action arose in Mumbai, whereas Hon'ble Apex Court in Rupali Devi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., reported in 2019 Cr. L.R. (SC) 429 has held that a woman has access to the legal process within the jurisdiction of the courts where she is forced to take shelter with the parents or other family members. The relevant para of the judgment is quoted as follows :-

'15. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, as the object behind its enactment would indicate, is to provide a civil remedy to victims of domestic violence as against the remedy in criminal law which is what is provided Under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The definition of the Domestic Violence in the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 contemplates harm or injuries that endanger the health, safety, life, limb or well-being, whether mental or physical, as well as emotional abuse. The said definition would certainly, for reasons stated above, have a close connection with Explanation A & B to Section 498A, Indian Penal Code which defines cruelty. The provisions contained in Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, undoubtedly, encompasses both mental as well as the physical well-being of the wife. Even the silence of the wife may have an underlying element of an emotional distress and mental agony. Her sufferings at the parental home though may be directly attributable to commission of acts of cruelty by the husband at the matrimonial home would, undoubtedly, be the consequences of the acts committed at the matrimonial home. Such consequences, by itself, would amount to distinct offences committed at the parental home where she has taken shelter. The adverse effects on the mental health in the parental home though on account of the acts committed in the matrimonial home would, in our considered view, amount to commission of cruelty within the meaning of Section 498A at the parental home. The consequences of the cruelty committed at the matrimonial home results in repeated offences being committed at the parental home. This is the kind of offences contemplated Under Section 179 Code of Criminal Procedure which would squarely be applicable to the present case as an answer to the question raised.

16. We, therefore, hold that the courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging commission of offences Under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

17. All the appeals are disposed of in terms of the above.'

2. Counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent- husband is a Navy personnel and his coming to Sangaria court would be difficult, therefore, in the interest of justice jurisdiction at Mumbai be maintained.

3. The precedent law relied upon by counsel for the petitioner is covering the issue as Hon'ble Apex Court in Rupali Devi (supra) has held that the courts at the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint.

4. Thus, in light of aforesaid precedent law, the impugned order dated 30.03.2010 is quashed and set aside and the order dated 22.01.2009 passed in Criminal Regular Case No.137/08 (State Vs. Rajesh Kumar & Ors.) is restored.