Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the criminal proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Vishakhapatnam lacked territorial jurisdiction and was liable to be quashed in exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: The complaint was founded on dishonour of a cheque which, on the materials placed, was presented through the payee's banker at Vishakhapatnam and returned unpaid there. In such circumstances, the place of presentation and dishonour assumes significance for determining jurisdiction under Section 142(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The fact that the underlying transactions may have occurred in Odisha did not, by itself, displace the forum where the cheque was presented and dishonoured. The earlier decision relied upon by the petitioner was distinguished on facts, as that case involved a complaint filed in a forum wholly outside the place connected with presentation and dishonour of the cheque.
Conclusion: The complaint at Vishakhapatnam was held to be maintainable, and no ground was found to quash the proceeding under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.