This article has been written by- Mr. Loknath Saha, a 1st year LL. B student from Lloyd Law College.

INTRODUCTION

Section 179 of criminal procedure code 1973, Its talk about when the Offence triable where act is done or consequence ensues. When an act is an offence for reason of anything which has been done or in a consequence which has ensued, the offence may be inquired into or tried by a Court within the local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such consequence has occurred. Here the scenario of crime gathered that how a criminal matter which actually committed in a place but the consequential harm or result came to later in different place and in this case crime like murder, robbery, extortion, grievous hurt such matter shall taken under both of the place’s jurisdiction and proceed can further carry by the injured party

.

RELEVANT SECTIONS WHICH CAME UNDER THE AMBIT OF SECTION 179

the sections which are under chapter 13 of criminal procedure act 1972 play a crucial role in the changes of facts of any matter which  dealt by every sections based on jurisdictional authority given but there is one important section that is section 462 which elaborate about what if any proceedings or trial or court came to any conclusion of judgment but the court has no ambit of jurisdictional authority at that point it may not harm the injured party in case if its create injustice and not fair trial then it will take by the appropriate higher authority under their consideration or if justice given based on the facts and issue there will be not an dispute regarding jurisdiction.

In some cases, we can see that section 179 and 182 observe by court in overlapping position such a occurred in Maharashtra where delivery of the property, were composite acts which began, in the particular case, with the delivery of the parcels to the post office at Panvel. This was an essential part of the offence and, although the consequent delivery of the property took place at Poona.

It is important to be noted that section 179 has crucial role in jurisdiction of courts in India because it led many factors such as state to state and sometime according to courts verdict some extra territorial events taken place which shows the criminal offences explicitly on cross border business.

OBSERVATION BY DIFFERENT SUBORDINATE COURTS AND SUPREME COURRT OF INDIA ON DISPUTE OF JURISDICTION UNDER SECTION 179 CRPC

In the case of Naresh Kavarchand khatri v. state of Gujarat here mainly discuss about the section 177 and its important relation with police personnel how they could take the investigation at initial stage if it’s come under the ambit of local jurisdiction where the crime actually be committed.

Kaushik Chatterjee v. state of Haryana (2020) 

It has been held by the court that the issue of jurisdiction of a court to try an offence or offender as well as territorial jurisdiction depended upon facts led in evidence, so the issue of territorial jurisdiction can not be decided before evidence is marshalled in a case.

Rupali devi v. state of U.P (2019)

Woman was forced to leave her matrimonial home because of cruelty, legal process can be initiated within the jurisdiction of courts where she’s forced to take shelter with parents or other family members. 

MCLEOD and Co. v. Gummalla Narasimha Rao (1973)

The offence of forgery and fabricating of a false document was committed within the local jurisdiction of court nearby. The said document had stated that the resignation of the complainant was accepted and that his services were terminated. On the complainant’s request a copy of that document was sent to the complainant who received the same within the local jurisdiction of the court of other. it was held that as the fact of receiving the copy of the document could not be considered as a consequence necessary to constitute the offence, court Y could not have any jurisdiction to try that offence.  

In the case of Mobarik Ali Ahmed v. State of Bombay, AIR 1957 SC 857 (86.-868) here court has been decided the question entirely under section 177 and later on under section 179 and 181. Fact of the case is that Appellant, though at Karachi, was making representation to the complainant through letters, telegrams and telephone talks, sometimes directly to the complainant and sometimes through Jasa Walla, On the strength of this analysis, it might be argued in comparable cases that no part of the offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property takes place at the accused person’s end and the entire offence is committed at the deceived person’s end. The application of either section 179 or section 182 might be regarded as of doubtful validity  Any offence which includes cheating may, if the deception is practised by means of letters or telecommunication messages, be inquired into or tried by any Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction such letters or messages were sent or were received; and any offence of cheating or of dishonestly induced delivery of property may be inquired into or may tried by any Court within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the property was delivered by the person deceived or have been received by the accused person.

ILLUSTRATUION

• M is put in fear and scared of injury within the local limits of the jurisdiction of Court X, and is thereby fireable induced, within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court Y, to deliver property to the person who put him in under fear situation. The offence of extortion committed on mostly be inquired into or tried either by X or Y.

IMPORTANCE OF SECTION 179

The trial commences when the inquiry stage comes to an end. It is the most important and the third part of a judicial proceeding. It is the process by which the guilt or innocence of an allegation on a person is ascertained.

According to section 190 of the CrPC, some points need to be kept in mind before the initiation of the proceedings. The trial is a part of the proceedings in which the examination of witnesses is done. Moreover, the cause is also determined by the judicial tribunal, and it is concluded by either the conviction or the acquittal of the accused person but in different cases in deferent facts courts observed that the interpretation under section 179 and 181 is important to initiate the trial for end proceedings.

CONCLUSION

In the observation of law given under CRPC it clearly stated after the high courts and supreme court interpretation of committing crime in any area whether outside state or outside country all the proceedings of enquiry shall taken place in Indian territory and Indian courts have that power against whom it committed whether outside Indian company or Indian company it explicitly expresses in accordance of law, when the court takes cognizance the matter it must be strictly followed because Special Leave Petition will not considered by higher courts because of the initial power of criminal courts on jurisdiction if factual circumstances quietly interpreted with sections given under chapter 13 of CrPC 1973.

REFRENCES

• Code of Criminal Procedure 1973
• MCLEOD and Co. v. Gummalla Narasimha Rao (1973)
• Mobarik Ali Ahmed v. State of Bombay, AIR 1957 SC 857.
• R.V kelkar’s lecture on criminal procedure 7th edition by K.N. Chandrasekharan pillai.