Sir, The Judge has wrongly consider that marriage took place at Infdore while FIR/Chargehseet clearly states that marraige held at New Delhi and hence he dismissed the Revision petition on charges framed under 498-A, 406,323,506 IPC. The operative part of Judgment is as follows: "14. So far as the territorial jurisdiction to try the case for the alleged offences is concerned; marriage of the revisionist/accused no.1 and the complainant's daughter was solemnised at Indore. The dowry articles were also entrusted to the which the accused have now misappropriated. Thus, the part of offence has been committed in the territorial jurisdiction of Indore. Therefore, the courts at Indore have got territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present case. Moreover, the transfer application of the revisionists/ accused has already been dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 15. I have gone through the authorities referred to by learned counsel for the revisionists/accused in cases Y.Abraham Ajith and others, Manish Ratan and others, Bhura Ram and others, Satvinder Kaur, Sajjan Kumar and Savitri Devi cases (supra). There is no dispute with regard to the law laid down in the said authorities, but the same are of no help to the revisionists/accused." Now I am seekin advice whether operative part of Judmnet can be corrected?
