Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajendra Marga Gaikwad, proprietor of Yashraj Agencies at Pune, was the original accused in a complaint filed by Kail Limited (formerly Kitchen Appliances (India) Ltd.) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complainant company had its corporate office at Mumbai and registered office at Aurangabad. The accused purchased electronic items from the complainant and issued a cheque for Rs. 3,36,751 drawn on Indrayani Cooperative Bank Limited, Pimpri, Pune, dated 1.8.2009. The cheque was presented for payment at Pune but was dishonoured. The complainant filed the complaint at Aurangabad through its power of attorney holder. The accused filed an application (Exh. 13) before the learned 10th Joint Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, challenging the territorial jurisdiction. The Magistrate dismissed that application by order dated 23.9.2010. Aggrieved, the accused filed the present criminal writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court examined the facts and held that the cheque was issued at Pune, drawn on a Pune bank, and presented at Pune. The dishonour occurred at Pune. No part of the cause of action arose at Aurangabad. The court relied on the principle that jurisdiction under Section 138 is determined by the place where the cheque is presented and dishonoured, not by the location of the complainant's registered office. The impugned order was quashed, and the complaint was directed to be returned to the complainant for filing before the appropriate court at Pune.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Place of Issuance and Presentation - The court considered whether the Magistrate at Aurangabad had jurisdiction when the cheque was issued at Pune, drawn on a Pune bank, and presented at Pune. Held that the cause of action arises only at the place where the cheque is presented and dishonoured, not at the complainant's registered office. The impugned order was quashed (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Magistrate at Aurangabad had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, when the cheque was issued and drawn at Pune and presented for payment at Pune.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order dated 23.9.2010, and directed the learned Magistrate to return the complaint to the complainant for presentation before the appropriate court having jurisdiction at Pune.
Law Points
- Territorial jurisdiction under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- Place of issuance and presentation of cheque determines jurisdiction
- Complaint at registered office of complainant not maintainable if no part of cause of action arises there
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (08) 7
Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2011
Shri P.R. Katneshwarkar holding for Shri S.R. Andhale for petitioner, Shri L.B. Palod for respondent
Kail Limited (formerly Kitchen Appliances (India) Ltd.)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of the Magistrate dismissing the accused's application questioning territorial jurisdiction in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner (original accused) sought quashing of the order dated 23.9.2010 passed by the learned 10th Joint Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, below Exh. 13 in Summary Criminal Case No. 1077 of 2010, and dismissal of the complaint for lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Filing Reason
The accused contended that the cheque was issued at Pune, drawn on a Pune bank, and presented at Pune, so the Magistrate at Aurangabad had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.
Previous Decisions
The learned Magistrate dismissed the accused's application (Exh. 13) challenging jurisdiction by order dated 23.9.2010.
Issues
Whether the learned Magistrate at Aurangabad had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, when the cheque was issued and drawn at Pune and presented for payment at Pune.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner (accused) argued that the cheque was issued at Pune, drawn on a Pune bank, and presented at Pune, so no part of the cause of action arose at Aurangabad, and the complaint was not maintainable there.
The respondent (complainant) argued that since its registered office was at Aurangabad, the complaint could be filed there.
Ratio Decidendi
Territorial jurisdiction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is determined by the place where the cheque is presented for payment and dishonoured, not by the location of the complainant's registered office. Since the cheque was issued, drawn, and presented at Pune, the Magistrate at Aurangabad lacked jurisdiction.
Judgment Excerpts
The controversy in the present petition revolves around the aspect of territorial jurisdiction regarding filing of the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
The cheque was issued at Pune, drawn on a Pune bank, and presented at Pune. No part of the cause of action arose at Aurangabad.
Procedural History
The complainant filed Summary Criminal Case No. 1077 of 2010 before the 10th Joint Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad. The accused filed an application (Exh. 13) challenging territorial jurisdiction, which was dismissed on 23.9.2010. The accused then filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2011 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
- Constitution of India: 227
