Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Netcore Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and its directors/officers, all residents of Mumbai, challenged the order dated 16.12.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur, issuing process against them in Summary Criminal Case No.16047/2010 for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint was filed by M/s Pinnacle Teleservices Pvt. Ltd. and its director Amit Srivastava. The petitioners contended that the magistrate lacked territorial jurisdiction as they resided in Mumbai, the cheque was drawn on a bank in Mumbai, and the cheque was presented at Mumbai. The court examined the provisions of Section 138 of the N.I. Act and the relevant principles of territorial jurisdiction. The court noted that the cheque was issued by the petitioners from Mumbai, drawn on a Mumbai bank, and presented by the complainant at Mumbai. The only connection to Nagpur was the complainant's office. The court held that no part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the Nagpur magistrate. Relying on the principle that jurisdiction must be determined by the place where the cheque is drawn, presented, or where the drawee bank is located, the court found the issuance of process without jurisdiction. The court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order, and discharged the petitioners.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Territorial Jurisdiction - Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Issuance of Process - The court considered whether the magistrate at Nagpur had jurisdiction to issue process against accused persons residing in Mumbai. The court held that since the cheque was drawn on a Mumbai bank, presented at Mumbai, and the accused resided in Mumbai, no part of the cause of action arose within Nagpur. The impugned order was set aside. (Paras 2-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur had territorial jurisdiction to issue process against the petitioners who are residents of Mumbai, in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order of issuance of process dated 16.12.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur in Summary Criminal Case No.16047/2010 is set aside. The petitioners are discharged.
Law Points
- Territorial jurisdiction under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- Issuance of process without jurisdiction
- Cause of action for cheque bounce
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (11) 95
Criminal Writ Petition No. 138/2011
Sunil Manohar, Sr. Adv. with Rohit Joshi for petitioners; S.V. Sirpurkar for respondent nos.1 & 2; A.S. Sonare, APP for respondent no.3
Netcore Solutions Pvt. Ltd. and others
M/s Pinnacle Teleservices Pvt. Ltd. and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging issuance of process under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners sought setting aside of the order of issuance of process dated 16.12.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur in Summary Criminal Case No.16047/2010.
Filing Reason
Petitioners, residents of Mumbai, were accused in a complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act filed at Nagpur. They contended that the magistrate at Nagpur had no territorial jurisdiction as the cheque was drawn on a Mumbai bank, presented at Mumbai, and they resided in Mumbai.
Previous Decisions
The learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur issued process against the petitioners on 16.12.2010 after perusing the complaint, verification, and documents.
Issues
Whether the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur had territorial jurisdiction to issue process against the petitioners who are residents of Mumbai in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that all accused are residents of Mumbai, the cheque was drawn on a Mumbai bank, and presented at Mumbai, so no part of cause of action arose within Nagpur jurisdiction.
Respondents argued that the complaint was filed at Nagpur where the complainant's office is located.
Ratio Decidendi
For an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, territorial jurisdiction lies where the cheque is drawn, presented, or where the drawee bank is located. Since the cheque was drawn on a Mumbai bank, presented at Mumbai, and the accused resided in Mumbai, the magistrate at Nagpur lacked jurisdiction.
Judgment Excerpts
By means of this Petition, the petitioners prayed for setting aside the impugned order of issuance of process dated 16.12.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class and Special Court under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act...
It is the grievance of the petitioners that all the accused against whom a complaint under section 138 of the N.I. Act was lodged were resident of Mumbai and, as such, resided beyond the jurisdiction of the learned trial Magistrate at Nagpur.
Procedural History
The complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act was filed by M/s Pinnacle Teleservices Pvt. Ltd. and Amit Srivastava before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur. The magistrate issued process on 16.12.2010. The petitioners filed Criminal Writ Petition No.138/2011 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the order.
Acts & Sections
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: 138
