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.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. MISHRA, J.

1. This transfer petition has been filed under Section 447 of the Bharatiya Nagarika Surakhya Sanhita, 2023 , shortly, “BNSS”, by the Petitioner, who is the Complainant in 1CC Case No.172 of 2024, which is now pending in the Court of learned JMFC-II, Cuttack, for transfer of the said proceeding to the Court of learned JMFC-IV, Bhubaneswar.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, the cheque was issued by the Accused, drawn on IndusInd Bank, Cuttack Chandi Road Branch, Cuttack. The same was deposited by the Petitioner, who is the Complainant in 1CC Case No.172 of 2024, in his Bank Branch at Bhubaneswar i.e. IndusInd Bank, Lewis Road Branch, Bhubaneswar. The said cheque was dishonoured and returned to him vide Cheque Return Memo dated 23.10.2024 with a noting “Drawers signature not as per mandate in the account”.

3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits, though in terms of sub-section 2 under section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 , shortly hereinafter, “the N.I. Act”, the complaint case ought to have been filed before the Court having jurisdiction at Bhubaneswar, on being advised by the learned Counsel for the Complainant, who gave notice under section 138 (b) of the N.I. Act from Cuttack, the complaint case was wrongly filed before the Court of learned JMFC-II, Cuttack.

4. Though it has not been pleaded in the transfer petition, learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits, the post of JMFC-II, Cuttack is lying vacant as the PO has been transferred. Now the PO, JMFC-III, Cuttack is in charge of the said Court.

5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, the Magistrate, who is in charge of the Court of JMFC-II, Cuttack, cannot pass any order for transfer of proceeding in 1CC Case No.172 of 2024 to the Court having jurisdiction to try the said complaint. Unless this Court passes appropriate order to transfer the case record in 1CC Case No.172 of 2024 to the Court at Bhubaneswar having jurisdiction, the Petitioner will be seriously prejudiced. If the Petitioner withdraws the said Complaint Case and files a fresh complaint case before the Magistrate having power at Bhubaneswar, there is every possibility that the said Court may not entertain the same on the ground of limitation, as prescribed under Section 142 (1)(b) of the N.I. Act.

6. Accordingly, a prayer is made to direct the learned JMFC-II, Cuttack to transmit the case record in 1CC Case No.172 of 2024 to the Court of learned JMFC-IV, Bhubaneswar.

7. In view of such submission made, it would be apt to reproduce below the provisions under Sub section (2) of section 142 of the N.I.Act :

“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, is situated or

(b) if the cheque is presented for payment by the payee or holder in due course, otherwise through an account, the branch of the drawee bank where the drawer maintains the account, is situated.

Explanation- For the purposes of clause (a), where a cheque is delivered for collection at any branch of the bank of the payee or holder in due course, then, the cheque shall be deemed to have been delivered to the branch of the bank in which the payee or holder in due course, as the case may be, maintains the account.”

(Emphasis supplied)

8. It is amply clear from Section 142 (2)(a) of the N.I. Act that, when a cheque is delivered for collection to the payee’s bank account, the relevant jurisdiction for filing a case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act would be where the payee’s bank branch, where the account