Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M.Bharanidharan Ranganathan, a Non-Resident Indian, filed a Criminal Revision under Sections 438 r/w 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) challenging the order dated 08.01.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, in C.M.P.No.1491 of 2025. The Magistrate had dismissed the petitioner's application under Section 173 BNSS seeking a direction to the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Branch, Avadi Police Station, to register an FIR on his complaint dated 23.12.2024. The petitioner alleged that he met one Rajendrakumar at ITC Welcome Group Hotel, Baroda, who induced him to invest in cryptocurrency. The petitioner, while in the USA, transferred a total of Rs.87,22,597/- to M/S Jessica Traders, a firm where Rajendrakumar was a responsible person, with office at Kodambakkam and residence at Ayyappanthangal, both within the jurisdiction of the Avadi Police. The petitioner argued that the complaint was maintainable before the Cyber Crime Police at Chennai. The Magistrate, however, held that the cause of action arose partly in the USA (where the transfers were made) and partly in Baroda (where the initial meeting occurred), and not within the territorial jurisdiction of the Avadi Police. The High Court, in its analysis, noted that the Magistrate's order was based on a consideration of the complaint and the submissions, and that the petitioner had not demonstrated any perversity or illegality in the order. The Court observed that the petitioner could approach the appropriate forum having jurisdiction. Consequently, the Criminal Revision was dismissed, and the order of the Magistrate was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Section 173 BNSS - Complaint for direction to register FIR - The petitioner, a Non-Resident Indian, alleged that he was induced by the accused to invest in cryptocurrency and transferred Rs.87,22,597/- from USA to the accused's firm in Chennai. The Magistrate dismissed the application under Section 173 BNSS on the ground that the cause of action arose partly in USA and partly in Baroda, and not within the territorial jurisdiction of the Cyber Crime Police, Avadi. The High Court upheld the dismissal, holding that the Magistrate's order was not perverse or illegal, and that the petitioner could approach the appropriate forum. (Paras 1-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Judicial Magistrate was correct in dismissing the application under Section 173 BNSS seeking direction to register an FIR on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Final Decision
The Criminal Revision Case is dismissed. The order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, in C.M.P.No.1491 of 2025 dated 08.01.2026 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Territorial jurisdiction for FIR registration
- Section 173 BNSS
- Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS
- Criminal Revision against dismissal of complaint for lack of jurisdiction
Case Details
Mr.S.V.Pravin Rathinam (for petitioner), Mr.R.Kishore Kumar (Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for respondents)
M.Bharanidharan Ranganathan
The Commissioner of Police, Avadi, Chennai; The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Avadi, Chennai; Assistant Commissioner, Cyber Crime Wing, Avadi, Chennai; The Inspector, Cyber Crime Wing, Avadi, Chennai
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal Revision against dismissal of application under Section 173 BNSS seeking direction to register FIR.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the Magistrate's order and direct the respondents to conduct enquiry and register FIR.
Filing Reason
Petitioner alleged that he was cheated by Rajendrakumar in a cryptocurrency investment scheme, and the police failed to register FIR.
Previous Decisions
The learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, dismissed the application in C.M.P.No.1491 of 2025 on 08.01.2026 on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Issues
Whether the Magistrate's order dismissing the application under Section 173 BNSS for lack of territorial jurisdiction was perverse or illegal.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the accused's office and residence are within the jurisdiction of Avadi Police, so the complaint is maintainable.
Respondents argued that the cause of action arose in USA and Baroda, not within the territorial jurisdiction of the Cyber Crime Police, Avadi.
Ratio Decidendi
The Magistrate's order dismissing the application under Section 173 BNSS on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction was not perverse or illegal, as the cause of action arose partly in USA and partly in Baroda, and not within the jurisdiction of the Avadi Police. The petitioner is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum.
Judgment Excerpts
The present Criminal Revision Case arises as against the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, in C.M.P.No.1491 of 2025, dated 08.01.2026, whereby the application filed under Section 173 of BNSS, seeking a direction to the Inspector of Police, Cyber Crime Branch, Avadi Police Station, to register an FIR upon the complaint dated 23.12.2024, came to be dismissed.
The learned Magistrate, after considering the complaint and the submissions, dismissed the application on the ground that the cause of action arose partly in USA and partly in Baroda, and not within the territorial jurisdiction of the Cyber Crime Police, Avadi.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed complaint on 23.12.2024 before Cyber Crime Police, Avadi. Police did not register FIR. Petitioner filed application under Section 173 BNSS before Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, which was dismissed on 08.01.2026. Petitioner then filed Criminal Revision under Sections 438 r/w 442 BNSS before the High Court, which was dismissed on 01.06.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS): 173, 438, 442
