1. Petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court in terms of Section 561-A of Criminal Procedure Code for quashing the, proceedings drawn in complaint titled FIL Industries Limited Vs. M/s Vasundhra Seeds and anr., under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (Sub-Registrar), Srinagar, and, orders dated 14th October, 2004 and 5th Feb., 2005, passed in the said complaint, on the grounds taken in the petition, which can be aptly and precisely summarized as under:-

2. That the trial court i.e. Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (Sub-Registrar), Srinagar, is not having territorial jurisdiction to try the case.

The cause of action has not accrued in terms of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, at Srinagar.

Petitioner (alleged accused No.2) is neither proprietor of the firm nor responsible for conduct of the business of the firm in any way.

Heard.

3. It is alleged in the complaint that accused issued cheque for an amount of Rs.3,45,772/- which was to be drawn at Devayana Sahakri Bank Limited, Kopergaon. Complainant presented it before UCO Bank, Budshah Chowk, Srinagar, on 9th April, 2002. The complainant was informed by the Bank authorities that cheque was received back due to "insufficient funds" and was returned to him which constrained him to serve a notice upon accused as per the mandate of law, and accordingly presented the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, hereinafter for short the Act, before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar which came to be transferred to the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (Sub-Registrar), Srinagar. The trial court has drawn cognizance and issued process against the accused vide order dated 25th July, 2002.

4. I am of the considered view that the series of steps give cause of action to the complainant for presenting a complaint in terms of Section 138 of the Act. It is profitable to reproduce Section 138 of the Act, herein, which reads as under:-

"138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account. -- Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintain by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provision of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both:

Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless-

(a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier;

(b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and

(c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the cheque within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice."

5. While going through this provision of law, it is crystal clear that drawing of cheque, presentation of cheque, dishonour of cheque, issuance of demand notice and failure of the drawer to make payment within 15 days from the date of notice are the ingredients which constitute the commission of offence and give jurisdiction to the court. It is not necessary that all the five acts should be committed within on

Click Here to Read the rest of this document