Section 202 CrPC treated as directory, and cheque-related acts at Mumbai sustained territorial jurisdiction for process.

Section 202 CrPC was treated as directory, so non-compliance did not invalidate the order issuing process. The objection to territorial jurisdiction also failed because the complaint showed a Mumbai registered office, deposit of the cheque at Mumbai, and receipt of notice at Mumbai; those facts were sufficient to found jurisdiction in the Mumbai Magistrate's Court. The process order was therefore sustained, while issues of debt, liability, and privity of contract were left for trial determination.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether compliance with section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was mandatory before issuance of process; (ii) whether the Magistrate's Court at Mumbai had territorial jurisdiction on the basis of the place where the cheque was deposited and notice was received.

Issue (i): whether compliance with section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was mandatory before issuance of process.

Analysis: The Court noted that the requirement under section 202 had already been considered earlier and treated as directory rather than mandatory. On that basis, non-compliance with the provision did not invalidate the order issuing process.

Conclusion: The challenge based on section 202 failed.

Issue (ii): whether the Magistrate's Court at Mumbai had territorial jurisdiction on the basis of the place where the cheque was deposited and notice was received.

Analysis: The complaint disclosed that the complainant's registered office was at Mumbai, the cheque was deposited at Mumbai, and the notice was also received at Mumbai. These facts were sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the Magistrate's Court at Mumbai.

Conclusion: The objection to territorial jurisdiction was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The process order was sustained and the criminal application stood dismissed, while the issues relating to debt, liability, and privity of contract were left for determination in the trial.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was treated as directory, and territorial jurisdiction could be founded on the place where the cheque-related transaction and notice were connected to the forum.

---