https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301875 The court upheld the magistrate's order directing the return of a complaint under Section 201(1) Cr.P.C, affirming that jurisdiction for trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act lies with the court where the drawee bank is located. The Supreme Court precedent emphasized the importance of notice service and discouraged multiple filings based on different locations of cheque presentation and notice issuance. The court dismissed the petitioner's reliance on local judgments, stating that the Supreme Court's interpretation prevails in determining jurisdiction for trying Section 138 offenses. The petition challenging the jurisdiction was consequently dismissed. en-us Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Apr 2022 11:24:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301875 The court upheld the magistrate's order directing the return of a complaint under Section 201(1) Cr.P.C, affirming that jurisdiction for trial under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act lies with the court where the drawee bank is located. The Supreme Court precedent emphasized the importance of notice service and discouraged multiple filings based on different locations of cheque presentation and notice issuance. The court dismissed the petitioner's reliance on local judgments, stating that the Supreme Court's interpretation prevails in determining jurisdiction for trying Section 138 offenses. The petition challenging the jurisdiction was consequently dismissed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301875