Territorial jurisdiction in cheque dishonour complaints turns on the drawee bank and place of dishonour, not notice or deposit location.

Territorial jurisdiction in Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act complaints depends on the place where the drawee bank is situated and the cheque is dishonoured. Issuing statutory notice from the complainant's chosen place, or depositing the cheque at a bank selected by the complainant, does not by itself confer jurisdiction. The article states that cognizance is postponed until the cause of action accrues, but the offence is committed on dishonour. Complaints filed before a court lacking territorial jurisdiction are to be returned for presentation before the competent court; where the High Court applied an overruled approach, the revisional orders were restored.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the issue of statutory notice from a particular place or presentation of the cheque at a bank chosen by the complainant confers territorial jurisdiction on the court at that place, and whether complaints filed in a court lacking such jurisdiction are liable to be returned for presentation before the competent court.

Analysis: The governing rule applied is that the offence under Section 138 is committed on dishonour of the cheque, while the proviso only postpones cognizance until the cause of action accrues. Territorial jurisdiction is determined by the place where the drawee bank is situated and the cheque is dishonoured. Presentation of the cheque at a bank chosen by the complainant, or issuance of notice from that place, does not by itself confer jurisdiction. The Court applied this principle to the connected appeals and upheld return of complaints where the Magistrate lacked territorial jurisdiction. In the batch where the High Court had wrongly interfered after applying the earlier overruled approach, the impugned order was set aside and the revisional orders were restored.

Conclusion: Jurisdiction in Section 138 complaints does not arise merely because notice was issued from, or the cheque was deposited at, the complainant's chosen place; the decisive factor is the location of the drawee bank and the place of dishonour. Appeals challenging return of complaints were dismissed, while the appeal challenging the contrary view was allowed.

---