( 1 ) A short controversy in this case as to whether, the case should be tried in the District of Morena or in the District of Gwalior.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is facing trial under S. 161 of the IPC read with S. 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The prosecution case is that the petitioner was posted as head master in a Government school at Banmore in the District of Morena. It is alleged that he used to ask for two per cent cut in the salaries to be disbursed to the teachers attached with the school. In the case of one of the teachers namely Mahendra Kumar an order of detachment was passed. It is stated that present petitioner assured the afformentioned Mahendra Kumar that in case, a sum of Rs. 1,000/- is given to him, the would see to that the continues to be attached in the school in question and he would get the order of detachment cancelled. This assurance is said to have been given at Banmore. In pursuance of the aforementioned arrangement, the payment is said to have been made at Gwalior on 14th March, 1988. A trap was laid and the petitioner is said to have been caught red handed. It is on these premises prosecution was initiated in the Court at Morena.

( 3 ) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Court as Morena have no jurisdiction because no cause of action has arisen within the aforementioned Court.

( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the State submits that part of the offence was committed in the District of Morena and the Courts at Morena would have jurisdiction. According to him mere demand by public servant would amount to commission of an offence under S. 161 of the IPC. He is placing reliance on a decision of this Court in the case Mubarakali v. The State, AIR 1958 MP 157 : (1958 Cri LJ 764 ). In para 11 of the judgment, it was observed as under :"on referring to S. 161 of IPC. I find that mere demand or solicitation by a public service amounts to the commission of an offence under S. 161 of the IPC". If above be the position, then it cannot be said that cause of action has not arisen within the local limits of the jurisdiction of Courts at Morena. The trial is thus, being held properly at Morena. This petition is found to be without merit and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.

.