Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
PRANJAL DAS
Shahidul Miyah, S/o. Matior Rahman – Appellant
Versus
Jahanara Begum, W/o. Late Nazrul Islam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. loan and cheque dishonor details. (Para 3) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments for transfer. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. legal provisions for case transfer. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. observations on territorial jurisdiction. (Para 13 , 14 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. conclusion on transfer petition. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
JUDGMENT :
PRANJAL DAS, J.
Heard Mr. J. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Hussain, learned counsel for the complainant/bank.
2. The petitioner invoking the powers under Section 447 BNSS is seeking transfer of N.I. Case No. 52/2023, pending in the court of learned Additional CJM, Mangaldoi, Darrang to the learned CJM, Barpeta.
3. Before proceeding further, the facts in a nutshell. The respondent Jahanara Begum is stated to have lent some money to the petitioner, amounting to Rs. 15,00,000/- and by way of returning the same amount, the petitioner issued two cheques on his Axis Bank account at Guwahati on 18-07-2023. But upon presentation, the same cheques came to be dishonored due to stop payment by the drawer and account block situation covered in 2125. After doing the statutory formalities under the N.I. Act, the respondent, as complainant, initiate
Natural jurisdiction in cheque-bouncing cases is determined by the location where the cheque is presented, and mere inconvenience does not justify transfer.
The jurisdiction for cases under the Negotiable Instrument Act is determined by where the cheque is presented for collection, affirming that local jurisdiction is based on the location of witnesses a....
Transfer petitions dismissed for lack of grounds, reaffirming jurisdiction based on statutory provisions of local bank branch presentation and emphasizing that convenience does not outweigh establish....
The court upheld the jurisdiction of the trial court for cases under Section 138, rejecting transfer petitions based solely on claims of inconvenience.
Jurisdiction for cheque dishonor complaints is determined by the location of the bank where the account is maintained, and transfer requests cannot be granted based solely on inconvenience.
Jurisdiction for complaints under Section 138 of the N.I. Act lies where the cheque is presented for collection; mere inconvenience does not justify transfer under Section 406 Cr.P.C.
Jurisdiction for cheque dishonor cases is primarily determined by the location of the payee's bank, as articulated in Section 142 of the N.I. Act.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
