When a criminal complaint is returned for lack of territorial jurisdiction under Section 201 Cr.P.C., the proceedings in the court of competent jurisdiction are to continue from the stage at which the complaint was returned, and the evidence already recorded is not rendered non-est.

*****

MANDEEP PANNU, J.

1. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the impugned order dated 18.04.2018 (Annexure P-10) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, whereby order dated 27.09.2017 (Annexure P-9) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad, in Complaint Case No.28 dated 20.02.2018 titled as “Parveen Kumar versus Rajbir Dahiya” under Sections 406, 420, 506 read with Section 34 IPC, Police Station Suraj Kund, District Faridabad, was set aside, and for upholding/restoring the order dated 27.09.2017 passed by learned JMIC, Faridabad, in the interest of justice.

2. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of the present petition are that initially, a complaint under Sections 406, 420 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC was instituted by respondent-Parveen Kumar against three accused persons, namely Rajbir Dahiya, Surender Singh and Dharambir Singh before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bahadurgarh. Upon consideration of the preliminary evidence, the accused persons were summoned to face trial. Thereafter, after recording of pre-charge evidence, all the accused persons were discharged vide order dated 08.08.2013 passed by learned JMIC, Bahadurgarh under Section 245 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved against the said order, the complainant preferred a revision petition and the revisional Court remanded the matter back to the trial Court for fresh consideration.

3. Pursuant to the remand order, learned trial Court reconsidered the matter and framed charges against accused Rajbir Dahiya, who is the present petitioner. Thereafter, the case proceeded further and the complainant led his evidence. The witnesses were duly cross-examined and even defence evidence was also led by the accused. The matter ultimately reached the stage of final arguments. However, at the stage of final arguments, learned JMIC, Bahadurgarh examined the issue of territorial jurisdiction and vide order dated 30.05.2015 held that no part of cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of Bahadurgarh Courts and that the Courts at Faridabad alone had jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint. Consequently, learned Magistrate ordered return of the complaint under Section 201 Cr.P.C. for presentation before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Faridabad.

4. The complainant challenged the aforesaid order dated 30.05.2015 by filing a revision petition before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar. The said revision petition came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 06.06.2016, whereby the order passed by learned JMIC, Bahadurgarh returning the complaint under Section 201 Cr.P.C. was upheld. While dismissing the revision petition, learned revisional Court specifically directed that the complaint along with all material evidence and documents relied upon by the complainant be returned for presentation before the Court of competent jurisdiction. Aggrieved thereafter, the complainant approached this Court by filing a petition challenging the aforesaid orders. However, this Court vide order dated 26.08.2016 also upheld the orders passed by the Courts below and affirmed that the Courts at Bahadurgarh lacked territorial jurisdiction whereas the Courts at Faridabad possessed jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

5. Thereafter, the complainant moved an application before the Court of learned JMIC, Faridabad seeking permission for filing/ presentation of the complaint before the Court of competent jurisdiction in pursuance to