Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Karuchola Satyanarayana - Appellant
Versus
State OF A.P. - RESPONDENT
Decided On: 12-24-01
The Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the Mobile Courts had the jurisdiction to exercise all the powers of a Judicial Magistrate of First Class, including the power to entertain complaints and try the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Headnote:
Negotiable Instruments Act - Jurisdiction of Sub-Divisional Magistrate - Section 138 - 142
Fact of the Case:
The accused filed a petition challenging the jurisdiction of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to try the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the Mobile Courts had the jurisdiction to exercise all the powers of a Judicial Magistrate of First Class, including the power to entertain complaints and try the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Issues: Jurisdiction of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to try the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the Mobile Courts was conferred with all the powers of a Judicial Magistrate of First Class, enabling them to entertain complaints and try the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Final Decision: The criminal petitions challenging the jurisdiction of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate were dismissed, allowing the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to proceed with the enquiry and trial in accordance with the law.
( 1 ) THIS batch of criminal petitions may be disposed of by a common order, since common questions arise for consideration.
( 2 ) THE petitioners are the accused in the complaint filed against them for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act. The complaints were filed on the file of the Sub-Divisional magistrate, Mobile Court, Bhadrachalam, khammam District. The Sub-Divisional magistrate having taken the complaints on file set the law in motion against the petitioners.
( 3 ) IN these applications, Sri P. Prabhakar Rao, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the Sub-Divisional magistrate has no jurisdiction to take the complaint on file for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act, 1881. Learned Counsel submits that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot be equated to that of a Metropolitan magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of First class. Reliance is placed upon Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which reads as follows: 142. Cognizance of offences:notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), (a) No Court shall take coginzance of any offence punishable under Section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may be, the holder in due course of the cheque; (b) Such complaint is made within one month of the date on which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to section 138; (c) No Court inferior to that of a Metropolitan magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first Class shall try any offence punishable under Section 138.
( 4 ) IT is true as contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that no court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, the holder in due course of the cheque. Section 142 of the Act further mandates that no Court inferior to that of a Metropolitan magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first Class shall try any offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act.
( 5 ) ADMITTEDLY the complaints in the instant cases are filed by the respondents before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (Mobile court), Government of A. P. , Bhadrachalam, khammam District.
( 6 ) THE question that falls for consideration is as to whether the Sub- divisional Magistrate (Mobile Court), bhadrachalam, Khammam District is equal to that of a Judicial Magistrate of First Class so as to enable him to take the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act on file and try the offence.
( 7 ) IT is brought to the notice of the court that the Government of A. P. , through a notification vide G. O. Ms. No. 406, dated 27-6-1990 accorded sanction for establishment of one Mobile Court, in the first instance, in each of the districts of warangal, Karimnagar, Medak, Nizamabad, mahaboobnagar. Adilabad, Visakhapatnam, east Godavari and Khammam with headquarters indicated against each thereof. One such Mobile Court in respect of which sanction has been accorded in khammam District with its headquarters at bhadrachalam.
( 8 ) THE Governor of Andhra Pradesh in exercise of the power conferred under sub-section (1) of Section 12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Central Act V of 1989) appointed the Sub-Divisional magistrate of the Mobile Courts at chintapally in Visakhapatnam District, the sub-Divisional Magistrate of the Mobile court at Rampachodavaram in East Godavari district and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of the Mobile Court at Bhadrachalam in khammam District sanctioned in G. O. Ms. No. 406, Home (Courts-A) Department, dated 27th June, 1990 to be Magistrates of the first Class and under Section 37 of the said code and invested in them with all the powers specified in the Fourth Schedule to the said Code as powers with which a magistrate of the First Class may be invested by the State Governme
