SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(KAR) 3331

HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
DR. DHARMASAI – Appellant
Versus
B H RAMACHANDRA – Respondent


The respondent has filed a private complaint under

Section 200 of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under

Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, alleging that the

cheque which was issued by accused No.1 towards legal

enforceable

debt

when

presented

for

realisation

was

dishonoured for want of funds.

2.

The learned Magistrate after recording the sworn

statement took cognizance of the aforesaid offence and issued

summons to the petitioner-accused No.3. Taking exception of

the same, petitioner-accused No.3 is before this Court.

3.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-

accused No.3 makes the following submissions:

3

a)

Cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate is

without territorial jurisdiction, since the cheque was presented

by the complainant through his banker at branch situated in

Bangalore and the complaint was filed before the learned

Magistrate at Thirthahalli and the same is not maintainable as

specified under Section 142 (2) of N.I. Act.

b)

The subject cheque was not issued by the accused

No.3 as he was not the signatory to the said cheque and as

such the cognizance taken by the learned Magistrate in sofar

it relates to accused No.3 is impermissible.

c)

The subje

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top