2020 (9) TMI 1240 - SC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - seeking transfer of the proceedings filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act pending on the file of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, Uttar Pradesh to the competent Court at Siliguri, Darjeeling, West Bengal - HELD THAT - If the delivery challan which states that all disputes will be subject to the jurisdiction of courts in Siliguri, is construed by the petitioners to constitute a bar for the courts in any other jurisdiction to entertain the proceedings, it is always open to the petitioners to raise this point before the Agra Court. This cannot be a ground for seeking transfer - the fact that the petitioners have made a prior complaint to the police about the loss that he sustained on account of the poor quality of feed supplied by the respondent herein cannot be a ground to seek the transfer of the proceedings under Section 138. The fact that the respondent has its Head Office at Siliguri and that there is no reason why it chose to file a complaint in Agra except to harass the petitioners, cannot also be a ground for seeking transfer. Under Section 142(2)(a) of the Negotiable Instrument Act, the court within whose jurisdiction the branch of the bank where the payee maintains the account is situated, will have jurisdiction to try the offence, if the cheque is delivered for collection through an account. Therefore, all the grounds on which the petitioners seek transfer, are unsustainable. The Transfer Petition is therefore dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Transfer of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act from Agra, Uttar Pradesh to Siliguri, West Bengal.

Analysis:
The petitioners sought to transfer the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act from Agra, Uttar Pradesh to Siliguri, West Bengal. The primary reasons presented were: firstly, the delivery challan stipulated that disputes would be subject to the jurisdiction of courts in Siliguri; secondly, the petitioners had previously filed a criminal complaint regarding offenses committed by the respondent; and thirdly, the respondent's Head Office was located in Siliguri, questioning the choice to file the complaint in Agra. However, the court found these reasons insufficient to warrant a transfer.

Regarding the delivery challan, the court emphasized that if the petitioners believed it restricted jurisdiction to Siliguri, they should have raised this issue before the Agra Court, rather than seeking a transfer solely based on this ground. The court highlighted that the prior criminal complaint lodged by the petitioners about losses incurred due to the respondent's actions did not justify transferring the Section 138 proceedings. Additionally, the fact that the respondent's Head Office was in Siliguri did not automatically necessitate the transfer to that jurisdiction.

The court referenced Section 142(2)(a) of the Negotiable Instrument Act, which establishes that the court where the bank branch maintaining the payee's account is located will have jurisdiction over the offense if the cheque is collected through that account. Consequently, the court deemed the grounds presented by the petitioners for transfer as unsustainable. Ultimately, the Transfer Petition was dismissed, and any pending applications were disposed of accordingly.