{"id":220869,"date":"2019-10-15T13:34:59","date_gmt":"2019-10-15T08:04:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=220869"},"modified":"2019-10-16T07:28:25","modified_gmt":"2019-10-16T01:58:25","slug":"bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/","title":{"rendered":"Bom HC | Magistrate&#8217;s Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Bombay High Court: <\/strong>S.S. Shinde, J. dismissed a petition while reiterating the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case, <em>Nikita v. Yadwinder Singh, <\/em>Criminal Appeal No. 1096 of 2019, wherein it was held that,<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u201cAt the place where the wife takes shelter after leaving or driven away from the matrimonial home on account of acts of cruelty committed by the husband or his relatives, would, dependent on the factual situation, also have jurisdiction to entertain a complaint alleging the commission of offences under Section 498-A of Indian Penal Code.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the present case, the petitioner and respondent married each other and Respondent 2 thereafter migrated to North Carolina, USA with the petitioner. On shifting to Carolina, in a matter of few years, Respondent 2 gave birth to a child with whom she left petitioner\u2019s home and went to her brother\u2019s place in Columbus. Petitioner after meeting Respondent 2 in Columbus filed a divorce and custody petition in the Supreme Court of California.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Further, it has been stated that, while the Supreme Court attempted to serve summons to Respondent 2, she deliberately evaded the service and shifted to Meerut in India. In the year 2015, Petitioner gave divorce to the Respondent 2 after which, Respondent 2 field permanent custody petition in Family Court, Bandra.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In 2016, Respondent 2 filed a Domestic Violence Case under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Mulund, that passed the maintenance order and in the year 2017, Sessions Court dismissed the Criminal Appeal filed by the petitioner.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Submissions of the parties<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsels for the Petitioner, Prashant Pandey, Vijayalaxmi Shetty, Darshit Jain, Irfan Unwala and M.A. Khan, submitted that there was more than two years delay in filing the complaint by Respondent 2 before the Magistrate\u2019s Court. When there was a delay, on the said ground alone, the Magistrate ought to have dismissed the complaint. Further, it was submitted that <strong>Magistrate has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint since the alleged domestic violence is not committed in India.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent 2, Shaheen, submitted that Respondent 2 is residing at Mumbai with her brother, and therefore, she has instituted proceedings before Magistrate\u2019s Court at Mumbai.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Petitioner was constantly threatening Respondent 2 and when Respondent 2 asked the petitioner about the renewal of visa, the petitioner flatly refused for such renewal. Petitioner relied on the Supreme Court case of <em>Nikita v. Yadwinder Singh, <\/em>Criminal Appeal No. 1096 of 2019 in respect to the jurisdiction of complaint received in regard to the commission of offences under Section 498A of Penal Code, 1860.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>What the High Court held?<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The bench in light of the Supreme Court decision stated above and along with the observations of the Courts below held that, <strong>there is no substance in the contention of counsel for the petitioner that, Magistrate\u2019s Court at Mumbai has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>In respect to the question of limitation for filing proceedings under Section 12, <\/strong>the Court relied on Supreme Court decision in <em>Krishna Bhattacharjee<\/em> <em>v. Sarathi Choudhury, <\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/s3017Nmf\">(2016) 2 SCC 705<\/a>, wherein it was held that,<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>\u201c&#8230;regard being had to concept of \u201ccontinuing offence\u201d and demands made by the wife, application made by appellant wife under Section 12 of the 2005 Act after about 2 years of judicial separation, not barred by limitation.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Another point that the Court noted in respect to the alleged harassment was that the Courts below made <em>prima facie <\/em>observations about the same. Since the order passed by Magistrate directed the petitioner to pay interim maintenance is an interim order and the proceedings for the same are still pending, the Court stated that it would not be appropriate to give elaborate reasons about the allegations on harassment and domestic violence.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Thus, the Court in view of the above rejected the writ petition. [Mohammad Zuber Farooqi v. State of Maharashtra, <a href=\"http:\/\/scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/eik017ys\"><b>2019 SCC OnLine Bom 2295<\/b><\/a>, decided on 25-09-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Bombay High Court: S.S. Shinde, J. dismissed a petition while reiterating the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case, Nikita v. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":74381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2554,37924,37923,31299],"class_list":["post-220869","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Jurisdiction","tag-magistrates-court","tag-section-12-of-protection-of-women-from-domestic-violence-act","tag-section-498-a-ipc"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Bom HC | Magistrate&#039;s Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bom HC | Magistrate&#039;s Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court: S.S. Shinde, J. dismissed a petition while reiterating the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case, Nikita v.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-10-15T08:04:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-10-16T01:58:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC | Magistrate's Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-10-15T08:04:59+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-10-16T01:58:25+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bom HC | Magistrate&#8217;s Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bom HC | Magistrate's Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bom HC | Magistrate's Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA","og_description":"Bombay High Court: S.S. Shinde, J. dismissed a petition while reiterating the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case, Nikita v.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-10-15T08:04:59+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-10-16T01:58:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/","name":"Bom HC | Magistrate's Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2019-10-15T08:04:59+00:00","dateModified":"2019-10-16T01:58:25+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/15\/bom-hc-magistrates-court-at-mumbai-held-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-complaint-under-s-498-ipc-although-alleged-offence-committed-in-usa\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bom HC | Magistrate&#8217;s Court at Mumbai held to have jurisdiction to try complaint under S. 498 A IPC although alleged offence committed in USA"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":372279,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/12\/kar-hc-quashed-proceedings-against-neighbour-in-s-498-a-ipc-case\/","url_meta":{"origin":220869,"position":0},"title":"Stranger cannot be drawn into proceedings under Section 498-A IPC: Karnataka High Court quashed proceedings against neighbor","author":"Shriya Singh","date":"January 12, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cPermitting further proceedings against the neighbor would become an abuse of the process of the law and result in miscarriage of justice.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"proceedings against neighbour under S. 498-A IPC","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/proceedings-against-neighbour-under-S.-498-A-IPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/proceedings-against-neighbour-under-S.-498-A-IPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/proceedings-against-neighbour-under-S.-498-A-IPC.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/proceedings-against-neighbour-under-S.-498-A-IPC.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":312150,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/25\/chhattisgarh-hc-complaint-filed-by-second-wife-u-s-498a-of-ipc-will-not-be-tenable-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":220869,"position":1},"title":"Complaint\/FIR filed by second wife for offence u\/s 498A of IPC against husband or in-laws will not be tenable: Chhattisgarh High Court","author":"Arushi","date":"January 25, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is vividly clear that when there are conflicting judgments of the Supreme Court of benches of equal strength, it is the earlier one which is to be followed by this Court.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"chhattisgarh high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/chhattisgarh-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":300297,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/29\/madhya-pradesh-hc-quashed-fir-and-criminal-proceeding-due-to-misuse-section-498a-of-ipc\/","url_meta":{"origin":220869,"position":2},"title":"Misuse of Section 498-A IPC| Madhya Pradesh High Court quashes criminal case against in-laws, calls it \u201ca case of reverse cruelty\u201d","author":"Ritu","date":"August 29, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cNow a day it is very common for the husband and wife to reside or do jobs outside of India and their parents are made to suffer in India by way of criminal or matrimonial litigation.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/madhya-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":215706,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/14\/del-hc-wife-entitled-to-lodge-fir-under-s-498-a-ipc-from-parental-place-where-she-takes-refuge-even-in-absence-of-allegation-of-harassment-at-the-said-place\/","url_meta":{"origin":220869,"position":3},"title":"Del HC | Wife entitled to lodge FIR under S. 498-A IPC from parental place where she takes refuge even in absence of allegation of harassment at the said place","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 14, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court:\u00a0Mukta Gupta, J. dismissed a writ petition wherein the petitioner husband sought quashing\u00a0of FIR registered under Section 498-A, 406 and 34 IPC at Police Station, Paschim Vihar, Delhi. The petitioner, who was represented by Hitender Kapur, Advocate, took three grounds seeking to quash FIR:\u00a0(i)\u00a0lack of territorial jurisdiction contending\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":351897,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/06\/30\/498-aipc-ipc498-a-supremecourtjudgments-supremecourt\/","url_meta":{"origin":220869,"position":4},"title":"Section 498-A IPC: A Double-Edged Sword &mdash; Protecting Dignity or Enabling Misuse? Supreme Court Rulings explored","author":"Editor","date":"June 30, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court continues to shape the interpretation and application of Section 498-A of the IPC, balancing the need to protect women from cruelty and dowry harassment with concerns over potential misuse. Recent rulings provide significant clarity on the scope and limitations of this provision, reaffirming its importance while addressing safeguards\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Law made Easy&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Law made Easy","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/law-made-easy\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"498-A misuse","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/498-A-misuse.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/498-A-misuse.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/498-A-misuse.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/498-A-misuse.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":324594,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/18\/can-offence-under-498a-crpc-committed-outside-india-tried-before-indian-courts-kerala-hc-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":220869,"position":5},"title":"Can an offence under S. 498A IPC committed outside India, be tried before Indian Courts? Kerala HC answers","author":"Editor","date":"June 18, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIf any part of the offence or even one instance of the overt act is committed in India, the sanction under Section 188 CrPC is not required\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"kerala high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/kerala-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/kerala-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/kerala-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/kerala-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220869","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=220869"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220869\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220869"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220869"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220869"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}