2020 Supreme(SC) 563

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V. Ramasubramanian, J.
KAUSHIK CHATTERJEE – PETITIONER(S)
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. – RESPONDENT(S)
Transfer Petition (Crl.) No.456 of 2019 with Transfer Petition (Crl.) No.666 and 681 of 2019
Decided on : 30-09-2020

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) While jurisdiction of a civil court is determined by (i) territorial and (ii) pecuniary limits, jurisdiction of a criminal court is determined by (i) offence and/or (ii) offender.
(2) Every offence should ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed – In case of uncertainty about the place in which, among several local areas, an offence was committed, Court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas may enquire into or try such an offence.

Headnote:

(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 26 – Transfer of criminal cases – While jurisdiction of a civil court is determined by (i) territorial and (ii) pecuniary limits, jurisdiction of a criminal court is determined by (i) offence and/or (ii) offender – But main difference between question of jurisdiction raised in civil cases and question of jurisdiction arising in criminal cases, is twofold – (i) First is that stage at which an objection as to jurisdiction, territorial or pecuniary, can be raised, is regulated in civil proceedings by Section 21 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – There is no provision in Criminal Procedure Code akin to Section 21 of Code of Civil Procedure – Second is that in civil proceedings, a plaint can be returned, under Order VII, Rule 10, CPC, to be presented to proper court, at any stage of proceedings – But in criminal proceedings, a limited power is available to a Magistrate under Section 201 of Code, to return a complaint – Power is limited in the sense (a) that it is available before taking cognizance and (b) that power is limited only to complaints, as complaint does not include a police report. (Paras 19 and 33)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 177 to 184 – Territorial jurisdiction of court – Every offence should ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed – In case of uncertainty about the place in which, among several local areas, an offence was committed, Court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas may enquire into or try such an offence – Where an offence is committed partly in one area and partly in another, it may be inquired into or tried by a Court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas – In case of a continuing offence which is committed in more local areas than one, it may be inquired into or tried by a Court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas – Where an offence consists of several acts done in different local areas it may be inquired into or tried by a Court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas – Where something is an offence by reason of act done as well as consequence that ensued, then offence may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction either act was done or consequence ensued – In case of an offence of kidnapping or abduction, it may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction person was kidnapped or conveyed or concealed or detained – An offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction property was delivered by person deceived or was received by accused person. (Para 21)

(C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 177 to 184 read with Section 26 – Transfer petition – Lack of territorial jurisdiction – Facts to be established by evidence, may relate either to place of commission of offence or to other things dealt with by Sections 177 to 184 of Code. In such circumstances, this Court cannot order transfer, on ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction, even before evidence is marshalled – Transfer petitions dismissed – However, it is open to both parties to raise issue of territorial jurisdiction, lead evidence on questions of fact that may fall within purview of Sections 177 to 184 read with Section 26 of Code and invite a finding. (Paras 41 and 42)

Facts of the case:

Seeking transfer of three criminal cases, all pending on file of the Court of the Additional Judicial Magistrate, Gurugram, Haryana, to any competent Court in New Delhi, a person who is implicated as one of the accused in those three cases has come up with the above transfer petitions.

Findings of Court:

Question of jurisdiction dealt with by Sections 28 and 29 of the Code of 1898 and Section 26 of Code of 1973, is relatable only to the offence and not to the offender. The power of a Court to try an offence is directly governed by Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 26 of the Code of 1973, as it was governed by Sections 28 and 29 of the Code of 1898.

Result : Transfer Petitions dismissed.