Eswaramma and Others vs G. Peddathippeswamy and Another

V. Rajagopala Reddy, J.—Though the 1st respondent was served notice none appeared for him. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor. This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order of the learned Magistrate passed in the M.C. No. 16/94 dismissing the same on the ground that the Court has no jurisdiction. The order is not a speaking order. On this ground itself the order is liable to be set aside.

Section 126 of the Criminal Procedure Code makes it clear that the proceedings under the said section can be taken against person, in any District. Where the wife of the husband resides, or the husband last resided with his wife. The concerned District is, therefore, the area of jurisdiction. It is not necessary that the parties should have resided within his jurisdiction.

Admittedly the parties belong to Ananthapur District. The petitioners who are the wife and children of the 1 st respondent can therefore, file a petition for maintenance u/s 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code before any First Class Judicial Magistrate in Ananthapur District.

For the above mentioned reasons the order in M.C. No. 16/94, dated 2.11.94 is set aside.

The Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ananthapur, as directed to restore the M.C. No. 16/94 on his file and proceed with the case on merits. The Criminal Revision Case is disposed of as above.