9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have jurisdiction to entertain the controversy arising out of the complaint filed by the appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. - CRIMINAL APPEAL No.717 OF 2015, Arising out of SLP (Crl.)No.8540 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 24-4-2015 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE For the Petitioner: Mr.Siddhartha Dave, Adv , Mr.Abhay Anand Jena, Adv., Mr.Ranjit Raut, Adv., Ms. Bina Gupta, Adv. For the Respondent: Mr. Avijit Bhattacharjee, Adv., Ms.Upma Shrivastava, Adv., Mr. Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, Adv. ORDER J.S.KHEHAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Leave granted. 3. The question is whether the Metropolitan Magistrate, 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er evidence has been led before the Magistrate at the pre-summoning stage, either by affidavit or by oral statement, the complaint will be maintainable only at the place where the cheque stands dishonoured. To obviate and eradicate any legal complications, the category of complaint cases where proceedings have gone to the stage of Section 145(2) or beyond shall be deemed to have been transferred by us from the court ordinarily possessing territorial jurisdiction, as now clarified, to the court where it is presently pending. All other complaints (obviously including those where the respondent-accused has not been properly served) shall be returned to the complainant for filing in the proper court, in consonance with our exposition of the law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exure P-5, we are of the view that the appellant recorded its statement at the pre-summoning stage by filing an affidavit on 16.02.2007. Consequent upon the filing of the aforesaid affidavit, the summons were issued to the accused-respondent No.1 for 21.04.2007. On 21.07.2008, the accused was examined under Section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the substance of the allegations were read over to him, whereupon, the accused having pleaded not guilty, the matter was adjourned for recording evidence on 31.12.2008. On 22.04.2009, the appellant filed an affidavit to be treated as the statement-in-chief of PW-1, whereupon, PW-1 was to be cross-examined. The Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta, then posted the matter for 22.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
