The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh recently stayed an investigation into a First Information Report (FIR) filed in Patiala, noting that the majority of the cause of action arose within the Jammu and Kashmir High Court’s territorial jurisdiction.
A single bench of Justice MA Chowdhary also considered that the petitioners, who were accused in the case, lived within the jurisdiction of the court.
While the proceedings were stayed, the Court issued a notice on the plea for the quashing of FIR.
“Since most of the allegations levelled against the petitioners relate to the incidents in J&K including subjecting the complainant respondent no. 04 to cruelty and causing miscarriage in the state of J&K, therefore, this court is having jurisdiction to entertain this petition as ’cause of action’ though not wholly but major parts of that has arisen, within the territorial limits of this court,” the order reads.
The petition arose from an FIR filed in Patiala for criminal breach of trust, cruelty, causing miscarriage without consent, and criminal conspiracy.
According to the petitioner, his wife filed the false allegations complaint as a counterblast to his judicial separation petition before a family court in Jammu.
It was also emphasized that the majority of the incidents cited in the complaint occurred in Jammu and Kashmir, where the petitioner was posted.
Thus, relying on the case of Navinchandra N Majithia v State of Maharashtra, the petitioner sought the dismissal of the FIR.
The Apex Court held in the Navinchandra decision that the High Court before which a writ petition is filed must determine whether any part of the cause of action arose within its jurisdiction, and this will depend on the facts of each case.
The bench agreed to hear the plea and stayed the investigation into the FIR, giving the respondents four weeks to file counter-affidavits.
The case is scheduled for further hearing on 19th July, 2023.
