While Crl.O.P. No.27882 of 2015 is filed to set aside the order dated 14.09.2015 passed in Memo in S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Mettur, Crl.O.P. No.1372 of 2016 is filed to call for the records pertaining to S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Mettur and quash the said complaint in S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 filed by the respondent.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to by their name.

3. Rajagopalan [the complainant in the case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for brevity “the Act”) and the petitioner in Crl.O.P. No.27882 of 2015] launched a prosecution in S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Mettur, for an offence under Section 138 of the Act against Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works and its Partners (Accused in S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 and petitioners in Crl.O.P. No.1372 of 2016).

4. It is the contention of Rajagopalan that he is a good friend of A.Perumal (A2 / Managing Partner of Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works) and together, they entered into partnership in certain ventures.

5. The long and short of K. Rajagopalan's story is that some disputes arose between him and A. Perumal and in settlement of the said disputes, a cheque dated 04.07.2014 for Rs.2,40,31,445/- (for brevity “the impugned cheque”) was issued by Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works, which was presented by him for encashment in his bank, viz., Vijaya Bank, Ganga Nagar Branch, Bangalore. The impugned cheque was dishonoured on the ground “Account closed”, pursuant to which, Rajagopalan issued a statutory notice dated 28.07.2014 and followed it up with the complaint in S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Mettur, against Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works and its Partners, as aforestated.

6. While so, it is the contention of A. Perumal that K. Rajagopalan had taken advantage of his proximity with him and had misused the impugned cheque leaf in breach of trust and had filled up the amount of Rs.2,40,31,445/- for the purpose of initiating a prosecution under Section 138 of the Act.

7. On the complaint given by Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works, the District Crime Branch, Salem, registered a case in Crime No.29 of 2014 against Rajagopalan and after a thorough investigation, a final report in C.C. No.11 of 2015 was filed before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Mettur, Salem for offences under Sections 405, 406, 408, 418 and 424 IPC against Rajagopalan.

8. Thus, there are two cases pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Mettur, Salem, viz., (1) S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 filed by Rajagopalan against Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works for offence under Section 138 of the Act and (2) C.C. No.11 of 2015 filed by the District Crime Branch, Salem, against Rajagopalan for offences under Sections 405, 406, 408, 418 and 424 IPC on the complaint lodged by Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works.

9. It may be necessary to state here that Rajagopalan had filed S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Mettur, Salem, prior to the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod vs. State of Maharashtra and Others [JT 2014 (9) SC 1981]. In other words, though Rajagopalan had presented the impugned cheque in his bank account with Vijaya Bank, Ganga Nagar Branch, Bangalore, yet, he chose to file S.T.C. No.2668 of 2014 before the Judicial Magistrate Court No.II, Mettur, within whose jurisdiction the bank of Sri Srinivasa Engineering Works is situate.

10. While so, the Act has been amended and Section 142(2) of the Act, as amended, reads as follows:

“142. Cognizance of offences:

2. The offence under Section 138 shall be inquired into and tried only by a Court within whose local jurisdiction,--

a) if the cheque is delivered for collection through an account, the branch of the bank where the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account, i