The main legal point established in the judgment is that in a proceeding under Section 138 N.I. Act, the Magistrate is not mandatory obliged to conduct an enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. before issuing process to the accused if the existing materials are sufficient.

JUDGMENT :

S.C. Parija, J.?Learned counsel for the petitioner files written note of submission and learned counsel for the opposite party files copy of the complaint in Court today, which are kept on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party.

2. This is an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., praying for quashing of the order of cognizance dated 24.7.2012, passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Pipli, in I.C.C. No. 37 of 2012, taking cognizance of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ('N.I. Act' for short) and directing issuance of process against the accused-petitioner.

3. The sole contention raised by learned counsel for the accused-petitioner is that as the petitioner resides at Bhubaneswar, which is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the learned J.M.F.C., Pipli, enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. was mandatory and the same having not been complied, the impugned order of cognizance is liable to be quashed. It is submitted that as the provisions of Section 202(1) Cr.P.C. are mandatory and admittedly, as no enquiry has been conducted by the learned Magistrate prior to taking of cognizance and issuance of process, the same is liable to be quashed. In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of this Court in L.P. Electronics (Orissa) Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Tirupati Electro Marketing Pvt. Ltd. in support of his contention that non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 202(1) Cr.P.C. vitiates the order of cognizance and issuance of process.

4. The impugned order of cognizance dated 24.7.2012, passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Pipli, in I.C.C. No. 37 of 2012, reads as under:

"The case record is put up for consideration on the point of cognizance. Perused the complaint petition, initial statement of the complainant furnished in the shape of an affidavit, the impugned cheque, Memorandum of the Bank and other relevant documents such as copy of legal notice, postal A/D etc. On careful scrutiny of all these documents and the sworn affidavit of the complainant clearly shows that prima facie material suggesting commission of an offence U/s.138 of the N.I. Act well exist in the case record. In such circumstances cognizance of the offence U/s.138 of the N.I. Act is taken as the materials available on record prima facie suggest the involvement of the accused Rajendra Kumar Sahoo in commission of such offence. The complainant is directed to file requisites within seven days for issuance of summons to the accused. Put up on the date fixed for appearance of the accused."

5. The question which falls for consideration in this case is whether in a proceeding under Section 138 N.I. Act, where the accused resides beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the concerned Magistrate, it is mandatory for the Magistrate to conduct an enquiry, as envisaged under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C., before issuing process to the accused.

6. The object of the provisions of Section 202 Cr.P.C. is to enable the learned Magistrate to form an opinion as to whether process should be issued or not. At that stage, what the Magistrate has to see is whether there is evidence in support of the allegations made in the complaint and a prima facie case has been made out on the materials placed before him. The scope of enquiry under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C., as amended with effect from 20.3.2006 is extremely limited to the ascertainment of truth of false-hood of the allegations made in the complaint, only to ensure that innocent persons living in or off places are not harassed by unscrupulous persons. The enquiry envisaged under Section 202(1) Cr.P.C. is only for finding out whether or not there are sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused. Therefore, if on the existing materials, it is not possible for the Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence, he can direct an enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C. However, if the materials existing are sufficient,