Friday, 15, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sabista Qureshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3614 MP

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3614 MP
Judgement Date : 26 July, 2021

Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sabista Qureshi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 July, 2021
Author: Vishal Dhagat
                                                           1                             WP-12092-2021
                               The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                          WP-12092-2021

(SABISTA QURESHI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

Jabalpur, Dated : 26-07-2021 Heard through Video Conferencing.

Shri Anuj Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Gulab Kali Patel, learned Government Advocate for the State. Petitioner has called in question order dated 8.5.2021 passed by 11th ACMM. Order dated 8.5.2021 is a notice informing the petitioner regarding

closure of the case in First Information Report in Crime No. 21/2021 under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Karkhana Hyderabad Telangana dated 6.2.2021. First Information Report filed by the petitioner is closed due to lack of evidence.

Registry has raised an objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition due to lack of territorial jurisdiction.

Counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied on judgment reported in (2011) 11 SCC 301-Sunita Kumari Kashyap Vs. State of Bihar and another. In the said case principles regarding territorial jurisdiction of a Court

to entertain complaint in respect of offence committed in other local area was laid down. Apex Court has held that offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code is a continuing offence and cause of action arisies at one place and if consequence of continuing offence of harassment and ill treatment is arising in other local area also then the said Court can take cognizance of an offence.

Case in hand is different from judgment cited by counsel appearing for the petitioner. In this case petitioner is aggrieved by closure report which has been filed before ACMM Telangana. Petitioner if aggrieved by acceptance of closure report of concerned Magistrate then petitioner ought to have raised his grievance before ACMM Telangana or could have challenged the order passed by the Magistrate before Higher Courts. Signature Not SAN Verified This Court has no jurisdiction to consider the closure report of police Digitally signed by ARVIND KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2021.07.29 11:06:38 IST 2 WP-12092-2021 and order passed by ACMM, Telangana.

Resultantly, writ petition filed by the petitioner is dismissed.

(VISHAL DHAGAT) JUDGE

DUBEY/-




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
ARVIND KUMAR
DUBEY
Date: 2021.07.29
11:06:38 IST
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter