The jurisdiction for trial of an offence is determined by where the offence was committed, as per Section 177 Cr.P.C., and the court must ensure that proceedings are not an abuse of process.

JUDGMENT :

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J.)

Heard Sri Vishwajeet Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Kaustubh Singh, Sri Pankaj Singh, Sri Suryansh Singh and Sri Dileep Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner and Sri V.K. Shahi, learned Additional Advocate General of U.P. assisted by Sri Anurag Verma, A.G.A.-I and Sri Ajeet Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following relief :

''WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may very graciously be pleased to set-aside/quash the cognizance order dated 20.12.2021, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, in Criminal Case No. 97946 of 2021, under Sections 120-B, 167, 195-A, 218, 306, 504, 506 IPC which is annexed as Annexure 1 and the charge-sheet No. 02 dated 27.8.2021 as annexed as Annexure 2 respectively to this application; and subsequent proceedings of the Sessions Trial No. 1188 of 2022 (State v. Atul Singh alias Atul Rai) pending before the Court of Additional District Judge -19/M.P.M.L.A. Court, Lucknow be also quashed.

Or,

to pass any order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court and to give effect to the provisions provided under the CrPC to secure the ends of justice.''

3. On the first date of admission i.e. 30.5.2023, this Court granted interim order, which reads as under :

''1. Sri Malay Prasad assisted by Ms Saloni Mathur, Sri Piyush Shukla and Ms. Tanya Makkar, Advocates, for the applicant and Sri Manish Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State, are present.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. The instant application has been filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the cognizance order 20.12.2021, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, in Criminal Case No. 97946 of 2021, under Sections 120-B, 167, 195-A, 218, 306, 504, 506 I.P.C., the charge-sheet No. 02 dated 27.8.2021 in pursuance thereof and subsequent proceedings of the Sessions Trial No. 1188 of 2022 (State v. Atul Singh alias Atul Rai) pending before the Court of Additional District Judge-19/M.P.M.L.A. Court, Lucknow.

4. The aforesaid proceedings have been initiated on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 27.8.2021 bearing Case Crime No. 309 of 2021 at P.S. Hazratganj, Lucknow, against the applicant and co-accused Amitabh Thakur by a Senior Sub Inspector of Police stating that an F.I.R. bearing Case Crime No. 548 of 2019 under Sections 376, 420, 504, 506, I.P.C., was registered against the applicant in P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi, in which a charge-sheet has been submitted for mounting undue pressure on the victim. As many as seven cases were lodged against the victim from the side of the applicant. The victim has submitted applications alleging undue pressure being put on her by the accused persons and she committed self-immolation at New Delhi on 16.8.2021.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has already been acquitted in the said Case Crime No. 548 of 2019 lodged at P.S. Lanka, District Varanasi. Regarding self-immolation committed by the informant at New Delhi, a case bearing F.IR.No. 113 of 2021, I.P.C. has been lodged in P.S. Tilak Marg, New Delhi.

6. The allegation leveled against the applicant in the F.I.R In question is that he had instigated the victim to commit suicide. The applicant is a resident of Varanasi and the deceased committed suicide at New Delhi. There is no allegation of any act committed at Lucknow, which may be said to be amounting to an offence committed by the applicant within the territorial jurisdiction of the Courts at Lucknow.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides that ''every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court in whose jurisdiction it was committed.''

8. The matter requires consid