Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Madan Motichand Gupta, proprietor of Quick Services, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad. The petition challenged the proceedings in S.C.C. No. 2032/2010 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Aurangabad, which was a complaint filed by the respondent, Videocon Industries Ltd., under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (N.I. Act). The petitioner had earlier filed an application at Exhibit 9 before the Magistrate seeking dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C., which was rejected. In the present petition, the petitioner primarily contended that the court at Aurangabad lacked territorial jurisdiction to try the offence, as the cheque was drawn on a bank in Delhi, the statutory notice was sent to Delhi, and the petitioner resided in Delhi. The petitioner sought quashing of the entire proceeding, setting aside of the order on Exhibit 9, or alternatively, a direction to the Magistrate to return the complaint to the complainant for presentation before the proper court. The High Court, after hearing both sides, noted that Section 462 Cr.P.C. expressly provides that no finding, sentence or order of a criminal court shall be set aside merely on the ground of want of territorial jurisdiction unless failure of justice has been occasioned. Therefore, quashing of the proceeding on this ground was not permissible. However, the Court observed that the proper remedy for the petitioner was to file an application under Section 201 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate for return of the complaint, and the petitioner was at liberty to do so. The Court also clarified that the other defences raised by the petitioner, such as the cheque being given as security and absence of service of statutory notice, were not considered at this stage. The petition was disposed of with the observation that the petitioner could raise the issue of territorial jurisdiction before the trial court, and the trial court was directed to decide any such application in accordance with law. The rule was discharged.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Territorial Jurisdiction - Section 462 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of Proceedings - The petitioner sought quashing of proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the ground that the court at Aurangabad lacked territorial jurisdiction. The High Court held that Section 462 Cr.P.C. expressly provides that no finding, sentence or order of a criminal court shall be set aside merely on the ground that the court had no territorial jurisdiction, unless failure of justice has been occasioned. Therefore, quashing of the proceeding on this ground is not permissible. (Paras 4-5) B) Negotiable Instruments Act - Territorial Jurisdiction - Section 138 - Return of Complaint - The petitioner alternatively sought a direction to the Magistrate to return the complaint for presentation before the proper court. The High Court observed that the proper remedy is to file an application under Section 201 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate for return of the complaint, and the petitioner is at liberty to do so. The petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue of territorial jurisdiction before the trial court. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the criminal proceeding under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be quashed on the ground of want of territorial jurisdiction, and whether the complaint can be ordered to be returned to the complainant for presentation before the proper court.
Final Decision
The petition is disposed of. The petitioner is at liberty to raise the issue of territorial jurisdiction before the trial court by filing an appropriate application under Section 201 Cr.P.C. for return of the complaint. The trial court is directed to decide any such application in accordance with law. Rule is discharged.
Law Points
- Territorial jurisdiction
- Section 462 Cr.P.C.
- Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
- Quashing of criminal proceedings
- Return of complaint under Section 201 Cr.P.C.
