https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277667 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, territorial jurisdiction depends on where the material components of the offence arise, including the drawing, dishonour, and connected transaction acts. Applying that principle, the complaint was found to be anchored to Chandigarh because the accused resided there, the cheque was drawn and dishonoured there, and the statutory notice and related acts were also linked there. The complaint was therefore held not maintainable at Indore for want of territorial jurisdiction and was directed to be returned for presentation before the competent court. en-us Thu, 05 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Dec 2018 17:51:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277667 In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, territorial jurisdiction depends on where the material components of the offence arise, including the drawing, dishonour, and connected transaction acts. Applying that principle, the complaint was found to be anchored to Chandigarh because the accused resided there, the cheque was drawn and dishonoured there, and the statutory notice and related acts were also linked there. The complaint was therefore held not maintainable at Indore for want of territorial jurisdiction and was directed to be returned for presentation before the competent court. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277667