SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN
Arnab Chatterjee – Appellant
Versus
Joginder Thakur – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Nitin Mishra, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J.—The present petition emanates from the proceedings initiated by the complainant-respondent against the petitioner under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short ‘Act’) pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Theog, District Shimla, H.P.

2. During the pendency of this complaint, a three Hon’ble Judges Bench of Supreme Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra and another, (2014) 9 SCC 129 had with regard to place of filing of the complaint over ruled its earlier view in Shamshad Begum (Smt) v. B. Mohammed, (2008) 13 SCC 77 and partly over ruled earlier view in K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan and another, (1999) 7 SCC 510 and held that the place, situs or venue of judicial inquiry and trial of the offence under section 138 of the Act must be restricted to where the drawee bank, is located.

3. It was further held that the territorial jurisdiction for filing of cheque dishonoured complaint was restricted to the Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the offence was committed, which is the location where the cheque is dishonoured, i.e. returned unpaid by the bank by which it was






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top