TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (12) TMI 897
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cuting loan agreement, demand promissory note and other documents in favour of the complainant agreeing to pay the said loan in equated monthly installments and the said loan was sanctioned on 05.08.2003. The accused did not pay the amount within the period and became defaulter. He was due for a sum of Rs. 2,67,054/- and for the said amount, the accused had issued a cheque dated 18.05.2011 drawn on Corporation Bank, Branch Bagalkot. When the complainant presented the cheque, the same was returned with an endorsement 'funds insufficient'. The complainant has informed the said fact to the accused by issuing legal notice dated 02.06.2011 and demanded to pay Rs. 2,67,054/- and the said notice was duly served on 04.06.2011, but the accused failed to repay the amount. Hence, the complaint was filed under section 200 of Cr.P.C. The trial Court after considering the material on record, taken cognizance and secured the accused and accused did not plead guilty and claimed for trial. The complainant in order to prove its case, examined one witness as P.W.1 and got marked documents at Exs. P.1 to 10. The accused was examined to give statement under section 313 of Cr.P.C., and accused d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dered by the trial Court as well as appellate Court. It is also the contention that the cheque in question has been materially altered by the respondent company without the express or implied consent of the petitioner, the cheque only bears the signature of the petitioner and rest of the contents namely the amount has been filled by the respondent. It is contended that the cheque in question never issued towards legally enforceable debt. The trial Court ought to have accepted the defence taken by the accused which is reasonably appears to be probable and both the courts have failed to take note of the said fact. The learned counsel also would vehemently contend that both the courts have failed to take note of the jurisdiction of the Court as well as merits of the case and hence, it requires interference by exercising revisional power. 4. The learned counsel in support of his argument has relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod vs. State of Maharashtra and another reported in (2014) 3 SCC (Cri.) 673, wherein the Court held that place of issuance or delivery of the statutory notice or where the complainant chooses to present the che....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... belonging to Corporation Bank, Bagalkot branch and the said cheque was dishonoured. The complainant in order to substantiate his contention that having availing the loan produced the documents Ex. P.1 to 10. Before considering the grounds urged in this revision petition, this Court would like to refer the documents which have been marked. Ex. P.1 is the subject matter i.e., cheque in question. Ex. P.2 is the endorsement issued by the Corporation Bank, Bagalkot branch. Ex. P.3 is the legal notice issued through an advocate of Bijapur. Exs. P.4 and P.5 are postal receipt and postal acknowledgment. Ex. P.6 is the power of attorney. Ex. P.7 is the reply given by the accused to the counsel of the complainant. Ex. P.8 is the complainants' housing finance corporation limited account with loan account is maintained at Bijapur. The bank statement is clear that an amount of Rs. 2,67,054/- was due. Ex. P.9 is the document of loan application given by the accused/petitioner herein addressing the said letter to the Bijapur branch. Ex. P.10 is the letter addressed to the Branch Manager, Bijapur Branch by revisional petitioner herein seeking time to repay the loan amount. 8. Having consider....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cheque is delivered for collection has territorial jurisdiction entertaining the complaint also section 142(a)(i) gives retrospectivity to the provision. The Hon'ble Apex Court in this judgment discussed section 177 of Cr.P.C., as discussed in Dasharath Rupsingh Rathod's case and having considered the amendment particularly the paragraph Nos. 58 to 58.7 of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod's case supra and extracting section 142 of NI Act i.e., in the principal Act and also insertion of Sections 1 and 2 in respect of section 142 and so also explanation and also section 142(A) in detail discussed in paragraph Nos. 11, 12, 13, which I would like to extract as follows: "11. It is, however, imperative for the present controversy, that the appellant overcomes the legal position declared by this Court, as well as, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Insofar as the instant aspect of the matter is concerned, a reference may be made to Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015, whereby Section 142A was inserted into the Negotiable Instruments Act. A perusal of Sub-section (1) thereof leaves no room for any doubt, that insofar as the offen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rically held that it is imperative for the present controversy, that the appellant overcomes the legal position declared by this Court, as well as, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and also a reference was made to Section 4 of the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Second Ordinance, 2015, whereby Section 142A was inserted into the Negotiable Instruments Act as proviso and comes to the conclusion that in view of the said amendment any judgment, decree, order or direction issued by a Court would have no effect insofar as the territorial jurisdiction for initiating proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned. Whether cheque is delivered for collection (through the account of the branch of the bank where payee or holder in due course maintains an account). It is also held that based on section 142(1)(a) to the effect that the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod's case, would not stand in the way of the appellant. Insofar as territorial jurisdiction for initiating proceedings emerges from the dishonor of the cheque in the present case. 10. Having taken note of the principles laid down in the ju....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....account, is situated; or b) if the cheque is presented for payment by the payee or holder in due course, otherwise through an account, the branch of the drawee bank where the drawer maintains the account, is situated and also explanation is clear that where a cheque is delivered for collection at any branch of the bank of payee or holder in due course, then, the cheque shall be deemed to have been delivered to the branch of the bank in which the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account. When such amendment was brought in 2015 and inserted section 142(2) of the NI Act, the very contention of the petitioner that the Bijapur Court is not having jurisdiction to try the complaint filed for the offence under section 138 of NI Act, cannot be accepted. 11. I have already pointed out that all transactions have taken place at Bijapur and loan was availed at Bijapur and loan application was given at Bijapur, correspondences were made at Bijapur and cheque was delivered at Bijapur and loan account was maintained by the payee at Bijapur, no doubt, the learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the answer elicited in the mouth of P.W.1....