9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 706X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... process. The amended Sub-section (1) of Section 202 of Cr.P.C. makes it obligatory upon Magistrate that before summoning the accused residing beyond his jurisdiction he shall enquire into the case himself or direct investigation to be made by a police officer or such other person as he thinks fit, for finding out whether or not there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused. Upon considering and analysing the object and ambit of Section 138 of N.I. Act vis-a-viz the objection of Sub-section (1) of Section 202 of Cr.P.C., the Court had observed that the provision may not apply to the provisions under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, and, merely because accused reside outside the jurisdiction of the Court, in each and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enging the issuing process by the petitioner is that the trial Court had taken cognizance of the complaint without taking recourse to inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is contended by the petitioner that he is resident of Mumbai and the complaint was filed in the Court at Solapur. It is submitted that on perusal of Roznama it can be seen that no inquiry as mandated under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. was conducted by the trial Court. It is submitted that the accused was residing beyond the jurisdiction of the trial Court, and, therefore, in accordance with Section 202 of Cr.P.C., it was mandatory to hold an inquiry contemplated therein before taking cognizance of complaint. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ijay Tata Ravipati (Supra), which is relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents. In the case of Dr.(Mrs.) Rajul Ketan Raj (Supra), this Court has taken note of decision in the case of Netcore Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Ors. (Supra). In the case of Vijay Tata Raviptati (Supra), it was argued that the applicant accused is residing beyond jurisdiction of the trial Court and hence it was mandatory to conduct enquiry in accordance with amended provisions of Section 202 of Cr.P.C. It was contended that though there is reference of Section 202 of Cr.P.C., no enquiry was conducted in proper perspective. The applicant therein had relied on decision of Supreme Court in the case of National Bank of Oman Vs. Barakara Abdul Aziz Anr.(2013) 2 SC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether or not there is sufficient ground to proceed against the accused residing beyond jurisdiction of the Court. In the case of Bansilal S. Kabra Vs. Global Trade Finances Ltd. 2010 ALL MR (Cri) 3168, while considering the applicability of the provisions of Section 202 of Cr.P.C to the complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, this Court has held that the inquiry which has tobe made in complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, is very limited to certain documents and the averments in the complaint. It is held that the mandate of Section 202 of Cr.P.C. if made applicable to the complaints filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, would defeat the very purpose behind the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
