9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 897X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue shall be deemed to have been delivered to the branch of the bank in which the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account. When such amendment was brought in 2015 and inserted section 142(2) of the NI Act, the very contention of the petitioner that the Bijapur Court is not having jurisdiction to try the complaint filed for the offence under section 138 of NI Act, cannot be accepted. P.W.1 also categorically given admission that cheque was presented at Bijapur Axis Bank and also endorsement was given by the bank of the petitioner in respect of Axis Bank in terms of Ex. P.2. It is suggested that he has falsely deposed that cheque is presented at Axis Bank and the same was categorically denied. Hence, having taken note of all these materials available on record, the very contention of the petitioner cannot be accepted - answered in negative. Whether the Courts below have committed an error in convicting and sentencing the petitioner herein and it requires revisional jurisdiction with regard to legality and correctness of the judgment of respective courts? - HELD THAT:- Regarding exercising of revisional power by the Court is concerned, the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 67,054/- and for the said amount, the accused had issued a cheque dated 18.05.2011 drawn on Corporation Bank, Branch Bagalkot. When the complainant presented the cheque, the same was returned with an endorsement 'funds insufficient'. The complainant has informed the said fact to the accused by issuing legal notice dated 02.06.2011 and demanded to pay ₹ 2,67,054/- and the said notice was duly served on 04.06.2011, but the accused failed to repay the amount. Hence, the complaint was filed under section 200 of Cr.P.C. The trial Court after considering the material on record, taken cognizance and secured the accused and accused did not plead guilty and claimed for trial. The complainant in order to prove its case, examined one witness as P.W.1 and got marked documents at Exs. P.1 to 10. The accused was examined to give statement under section 313 of Cr.P.C., and accused denied the incriminating evidence but not led any defence evidence. The trial Court after considering both oral and documentary evidence convicted the accused and sentenced to pay an amount of ₹ 2,97,000/- Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and order of payment of fine, the appeal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mely the amount has been filled by the respondent. It is contended that the cheque in question never issued towards legally enforceable debt. The trial Court ought to have accepted the defence taken by the accused which is reasonably appears to be probable and both the courts have failed to take note of the said fact. The learned counsel also would vehemently contend that both the courts have failed to take note of the jurisdiction of the Court as well as merits of the case and hence, it requires interference by exercising revisional power. 4. The learned counsel in support of his argument has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2014) 3 SCC (Cri.) 673, wherein the Court held that place of issuance or delivery of the statutory notice or where the complainant chooses to present the cheque for encashment by his bank are not relevant for purposes of determining territorial jurisdiction for filing of cheque dishonour complaints. 5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the complainant would vehemently contend that all transactions have taken place at Bijapur and Ex. P.8 to 10 dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court would like to refer the documents which have been marked. Ex. P.1 is the subject matter i.e., cheque in question. Ex. P.2 is the endorsement issued by the Corporation Bank, Bagalkot branch. Ex. P.3 is the legal notice issued through an advocate of Bijapur. Exs. P.4 and P.5 are postal receipt and postal acknowledgment. Ex. P.6 is the power of attorney. Ex. P.7 is the reply given by the accused to the counsel of the complainant. Ex. P.8 is the complainants' housing finance corporation limited account with loan account is maintained at Bijapur. The bank statement is clear that an amount of ₹ 2,67,054/- was due. Ex. P.9 is the document of loan application given by the accused/petitioner herein addressing the said letter to the Bijapur branch. Ex. P.10 is the letter addressed to the Branch Manager, Bijapur Branch by revisional petitioner herein seeking time to repay the loan amount. 8. Having considered these documents, it is clear that the complainant is having a branch at Bijapur and the revisional petitioner by giving application to the branch at Bijapur had availed the loan from Bijapur branch and also letter is addressed seeking repayment of loan to the Bijapur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hod's case and having considered the amendment particularly the paragraph Nos. 58 to 58.7 of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod's case supra and extracting section 142 of NI Act i.e., in the principal Act and also insertion of Sections 1 and 2 in respect of section 142 and so also explanation and also section 142(A) in detail discussed in paragraph Nos. 11, 12, 13, which I would like to extract as follows: 11. It is, however, imperative for the present controversy, that the appellant overcomes the legal position declared by this Court, as well as, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, a reference may be made to Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015, whereby Section 142A was inserted into the Negotiable Instruments Act. A perusal of Sub-section (1) thereof leaves no room for any doubt, that insofar as the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned, on the issue of jurisdiction, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, would have to give way to the provisions of the instant enactment on account of the non-obstante clause in sub-sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Instruments (Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015, whereby Section 142A was inserted into the Negotiable Instruments Act as proviso and comes to the conclusion that in view of the said amendment any judgment, decree, order or direction issued by a Court would have no effect insofar as the territorial jurisdiction for initiating proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned. Whether cheque is delivered for collection (through the account of the branch of the bank where payee or holder in due course maintains an account). It is also held that based on section 142(1)(a) to the effect that the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod's case, would not stand in the way of the appellant. Insofar as territorial jurisdiction for initiating proceedings emerges from the dishonor of the cheque in the present case. 10. Having taken note of the principles laid down in the judgments and also considering the facts and circumstances of the case and as I have already pointed out that all transactions were taken place at Bijapur i.e., giving application for loan to the branch of Bijapur, loan was availed from Bijapur, and bank l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere a cheque is delivered for collection at any branch of the bank of payee or holder in due course, then, the cheque shall be deemed to have been delivered to the branch of the bank in which the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account. When such amendment was brought in 2015 and inserted section 142(2) of the NI Act, the very contention of the petitioner that the Bijapur Court is not having jurisdiction to try the complaint filed for the offence under section 138 of NI Act, cannot be accepted. 11. I have already pointed out that all transactions have taken place at Bijapur and loan was availed at Bijapur and loan application was given at Bijapur, correspondences were made at Bijapur and cheque was delivered at Bijapur and loan account was maintained by the payee at Bijapur, no doubt, the learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the answer elicited in the mouth of P.W.1 regarding having the service branch at Bagalkot, but it is clear that they were having only this service center at Bagalkot and he categorically admits that they were not having any branch at Bagalkot and only one officer by name Nagaraj Pattar is inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
