The revision petitioner is the complainant in C.M.P.No.404 of 2015 on the files of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court (Economic Offences), Ernakulam. The above C.M.P. was filed against the respondents 1 to 3 herein, alleging the offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the N.I. Act'). It is the case of the revision petitioner that the respondents owed an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to him and in discharge of the said debt, the accused issued an 'at par cheque' drawn on the Axis Bank, Gandhi Nagar Branch, Gujarat, payable at any Branch of the said Bank. So, he presented the said cheque for encashment in the Ravipuram Branch, Ernakulam, of the Axis Bank and got dishonoured and returned for want of sufficient funds. Thus, the dishonour of the cheque was occurred at Axis Bank, Ravipuram Branch, Ernakulam. Therefore, the court in which the complainant filed the complaint has jurisdiction to try the complaint. But the court below, without considering the decision laid down by the Apex Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra [2014 (3) KLT 605 (SC)], in its correct perspective, returned the complaint on an erroneo