9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 1049X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... territorial jurisdiction. Heard Mr. S. Nawas, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. for the state respondent. Mr. Nawas, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the learned court below had dismissed the complaint on the ground that under section 142(2) of the N.I. Act it had no jurisdiction as the cheque in question is a bearer cheque, which according to Mr. Nawas is an outcome of misreading of the relevant provision. Mr. Nawas further submits that there is no classification of cheque, be it cross cheque or bearer cheque, for filing a case under the N.I. Act and as such dismissing the complaint for being the cheque in question is a bearer cheque, is nothing but a misconception. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or collection in his account maintained at State Bank of India, Hojai Branch, on 25.11.2021. But, the same returned dishonored with an endorsement that 'account closed.' The petitioner then issued demand notice. But, the respondent refused to receive the same. The petitioner then filed a complaint under section 138 N.I. Act. But, the learned court below had dismissed the same on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. While dismissing the complaint the learned court below held that from section 142(2) of N.I. Act it is clear that in case of a cross cheque or account payee cheque, the court within whose jurisdiction the complainant has an account has the jurisdiction and in case of bearer cheque the court where the accused has an ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n be made for the purpose of jurisdiction, being not provided in the Act. Moreover, from the word 'any cheque', used in section 138, it can be well inferred that it may be an account payee cheque or a bearer cheque, dishonor of which on account of insufficiency of fund or exceed the amount would amount to an offence and would attract the penalty. From the Annexure-1 and Annexure-2, of the petition, it appears that the petitioner has account, maintained in the State Bank of India, Hojai Branch. Being the holder of the cheque, and having his account maintained at State Bank of India, Hojai Branch, the petitioner had presented the cheque there for collection. He received the intimation about dishonor of the cheque in question through the Stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
