AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 384 wordsJ.C.S. Rawat, J.—This is a petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the impugned order dated 14.05.2008 passed by the Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No. 377 of 2008 tilted as ''Pradeep Saini v. Ashok Kumar'' u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Perusal of the record reveals that a cheque given by the petitioner was dishonoured by the bank and the statutory notice was given and thereafter the complaint was filed. The main ground taken in this petition is that learned Ist Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar has no jurisdiction to try this case because the cheque which was issued by the petitioner belongs to the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Roorkee and the said cheque was presented by the respondent No. 2 in his bank i.e. State Bank of India, Roorkee for its clearance. The said Cheque was dishonoured by the petitioner''s bank and the information of this Cheque was sent to the respondent No. 2 that the payment has been stopped by the drawer. After due consideration of the submissions of the learned Counsel for the applicant and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, even if the view is taken that the territorial jurisdiction of this matter is with the court of Roorkee and not the Haridwar, both places i.e. Haridwar and Roorkee are situated in one Sessions Division and if the complaint is filed before the Ist A.C.J.M., Haridwar it is merely an irregularity and under the inherent powers of this Court this case can be transferred to the court of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee. The other ground made in the petition that Section 138 of the N.I. Act is not attracted in this matter is not tenable. The cheque has been dishonored by the bank on the ground that the payment has been stopped by the drawer. The ground and the reasons of stopping the payment can be seen at the time of trial of this case. I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order. However, it is directed that under the powers conferred u/s 482 Cr.P.C. the case is transferred from the court of Ist A.C.J.M., Haridwar to the court of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee for further trial of the case.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.
