Saturday, 10 October 2020

Whether Criminal court can decide the issue of its territorial jurisdiction before the recording of evidence?

  But be that as it may, the upshot of the above discussion

is (i) that the issue of jurisdiction of a court to try an “offence”

or “offender” as well as the issue of territorial jurisdiction,

depend upon facts established through evidence (ii) that if the

issue is one of territorial jurisdiction, the same has to be

decided with respect to the various rules enunciated in sections

177 to 184 of the Code and (iii) that these questions may have

to be raised before the court trying the offence and such court

is bound to consider the same.{Para 39}

40. Having taken note of the legal position, let me now come

back to the cases on hand.

41. As seen from the pleadings, the type of jurisdictional

issue, raised in the cases on hand, is one of territorial

jurisdiction, atleast as of now. The answer to this depends upon

facts to be established by evidence. The facts to be established

by evidence, may relate either to the place of commission of the

offence or to other things dealt with by Sections 177 to 184 of

the Code. In such circumstances, this Court cannot order

transfer, on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction, even

before evidence is marshaled. Hence the transfer petitions are

liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, they are dismissed.

41. However, it is open to both parties to raise the issue of

territorial jurisdiction, lead evidence on questions of fact that

may fall within the purview of Sections 177 to 184 read with

Section 26 of the Code and invite a finding. 

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

TRANSFER PETITION (CRL.) NO.456 OF 2019

KAUSHIK CHATTERJEE  Vs STATE OF HARYANA 

Dated: SEPTEMBER 30, 2020.

Read full judgment here: Click here

Print Page

No comments:

Post a comment