9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Code of Criminal Procedure, thus necessitating a discussion on the issue of forum convenience. The criminal case/police case lodged by the complainant/O.P. No. 2 may be against the petitioner only but that case operates in a different field, for a different offence or set of offences. The O.P. No. 2 has deliberately chosen to file a complaint at Bhagalpur where he maintains an account in which the cheques were presented and seeks to oppose the present petition as well. Application dismissed. - Criminal Miscellaneous No. 25296 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 6-4-2018 - Ashutosh Kumar, J. For the Petitioners : Mr. Diwakar Upadhyaya For the Opposite Partys : Mr. Sri. Kumar Virendra Narayan JUDGMENT The petitioner has challenged the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by the learned A.C.J.M-XIV, Bhagalpur in connection with Complaint Case No. 2227 of 2013 whereby the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for transferring the case from Bhagalpur to Katihar on the ground of territorial jurisdiction has been rejected. 2. Rajeev Upadhyay/O.P. No. 2 had lodged a complaint vide Complaint Case No. 2227 of 2013 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhagalpur alleging tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowing grounds. (a) The cause of action has accrued at Katihar where the cheques issued by the petitioner have been dishonoured. (b) The cheques are not stated to be crossed cheques and therefore, it would be deemed to have been given to the complainant/O.P. No. 2 for presenting it before the drawer bank and (c) It would be convenient for the parties if the Complaint Case at Bhagalpur and the Police Case at Katihar which have been lodged by the complainant/O.P. No. 2, be tried in the Katihar Judgeship. 8. The aforesaid contentions of the petitioner has been sought to be repelled by the learned counsel appearing for the complainant/O.P. No. 2 on the ground that the amended Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 gives the jurisdiction to try the present complaint only at Bhagalpur, where the cheques were delivered for collection through an account as the complainant/O.P. No. 2 maintained an account at Bhagalpur. 9. Section 142 of the amended Negotiable Instruments Act reads as follows:- 142. Cognizance of offences.-[(1)] Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),- (a) no Court shall take cognizance of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of funds in the account.- Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with the bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provision of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for [a term which may be extended to two years], or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless- (a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months* from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier; (b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, mak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n offence is a continuing one, and continues to be committed in more local areas than one, or (d) where it consists of several acts done in different local areas, it may be inquired into or tried by a Court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas. 179. Offence triable where act is done or consequence ensues.-When an act is an offence by reason of anything which has been done and of a consequence which has ensued, the offence may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such consequence has ensued. 16. In K. Bhaskaran versus Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan and Another (1999) 7 SCC 510, the Supreme Court held that a complainant can chose anyone of the Courts having jurisdiction over anyone of the local areas within the territorial limits in which anyone of the five acts may have been committed. It was felt by the Supreme Court that as the amptitude stood so widened and expansive, it would only be an idle exercise to raise jurisdictional question regarding the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 17. However, a departure was made by the Supreme Court in its approach in Harman Electroni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s located will only have the jurisdiction to try the case. 21. However, with the aforesaid judgment, some difficulty arose with the modern banking system. Traditionally, the cheques travelled from the bank where they were presented to the drawer bank branch. In the modern day banking, the cheques do not travel to drawer bank. It was also felt that from the equity point of view, the jurisdictional issue needed a clarification. 22. Hence, the amendment under Section 142(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act was brought about. 23. The amendment in the act virtually supersedes the decision of the Supreme Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod (Supra). Now, with the amendment of Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the Court having jurisdiction over the place where the payee bank is situated and where the cheque is delivered for collection through an account, shall have the jurisdiction to try a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. However, if the cheque is presented by the payee, otherwise through an account, i.e. over the counter, the jurisdiction would be of the Court where the drawer bank is situated. 24. The explanation added to Section 14 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
