9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1259X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitions are filed for quashing of various orders passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nandurbar in the Summary Criminal Cases Nos. 1010/2019, 1011/2019, 1012/2019 and 1013/2019 registered under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, "the N.I. Act"). 4. The petitioner moved various applications which are mentioned below writ-wise. Those were rejected. The applications of the respondent No. 2 for grant of interim compensation were allowed. All those impugned orders are challenged in these writ petitions :- i) CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 226 OF 2023 An order passed below Exh. 1 of issue process, Exh. 35 for production of statement of bank accounts of the respondent No. 2, Exh. 36 for sending cheques to the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he agreement by Court and Exh. 12 for grant of interim compensation. iv) CRI. WRIT PETITION NO. 234 OF 2023 An order passed below Exh. 1 of issue process, Exh. 21 for discharge of the petitioner and for dismissal of complaint for want of jurisdiction, Exh. 32 for production of statement of bank account of the respondent No. 2, Exh. 36 the direction for merging all charges and clubbing four cases and to try them as one and same offence, Exh. 33 for sending cheque to Handwriting Expert, Exh. 35 for verification of each signature of petitioner on each page of the agreement by the Court and Exh. 12 for grant of interim compensation filed by the respondent No. 2. 5. The brief facts of all these cases are as under :- a) There were some m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsaction took place between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 at Pune. However, mischievously and in order to harass the petitioner, these complaints are filed in the Court of JMFC, Nandurbar. The Nandurbar JMFC Court has no jurisdiction to try these complaints cases. A petitioner is residing at Pune and not at Nandurbar. The procedure as to inquiry as per Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C.) was not followed by the learned JMFC, Nandurbar. The enquiry as per Section 202 of the Cr.P.C. is mandatory and without making enquiry, the orders of issue process are illegal. He lastly submitted to allow all the writ petitions as all the orders passed against petitioner are illegal. 8. Learned advocate for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i] 2023 DGLS (Bom.) 4467 [Mukund s/o Manohar Wazalwar Vrs. Eknath s/o Bajirao Hatwar (Dead) through his LRs Durwas Eknath Hatwar and others.] in which it is held that Section 239 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable to the Summary Proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. ii] 2021 SCC OnLine SC 1174 [Sunil Todi and others Vrs. State of Gujarat and another.] The Magistrate having exercised his discretion, it was not open to the High Court to substitute its discretion in case of issue process under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. 11. Nobody will dispute the ratio laid down in the above authorities cited on behalf of both sides. However, it is well settled that each case has to be decided on it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... required for hearing of discharge application. The learned Trial Court observed and held that such applications can be moved later on and all applications can be considered when defence leads evidence at proper stage. The petitioner has ample opportunity to lead that evidence. The Court can also compare signatures on it under Section 73 of the Indian Evidence Act. The Court expressed that it will compare signature. It is surprising to note that once issuance of cheques is admitted by the petitioner, how the signature on it can be challenged. There is no scope for interference in these well reasoned impugned orders. 16. The applications filed for comparison and verification of signature and Handwriting of the petitioner on disputed cheques ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aintainable before trial court. 18. The applications were filed for dismissal of complaint for want of jurisdiction. Those were rejected. However, those orders are not interlocutory. The revisions before Sessions Court against the orders of Trial Court regarding issue of jurisdiction are to be filed. Those were not filed by the petitioner. In case of rejecting the application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to proceed with the trial, even though it may not be final in one sense, is surely not interlocutory order, substantially it is a final order as held in the case of Jai Prakash Vrs. Radhey Shyam, reported in 1987 (2) Crimes 363, 368 (All). Further, an order rejecting an application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
