PRAKASH CHIMANLAL SHETH Vs. JAGRUTI KEYUR RAJPOPAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The short issue in these appeals is as to where the appellant was required to file his complaints in relation to offences punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for brevity, 'N.I. Act').

(3.) The appellant's case was that Keyur Lalitbhai Rajpopat borrowed a sum of Rs.38,50,000.00 from him and the respondent herein, viz., Jagruti Keyur Rajpopat, being the wife of Keyur Lalitbhai Rajpopat, stood as a guarantor for the repayment of the loan. It appears that she also availed financial assistance from the appellant and four cheques came to be issued by her during September, 2023, in discharge of her husband's liability and her own liability. These cheques were deposited by the appellant at Kotak Mahindra Bank, Opera House Branch, Mumbai. However, they were dishonored due to insufficiency of funds, as was intimated to the appellant on 15/9/2023. Thereupon, he filed four complaint cases in C.C. Nos. 1258, 1259, 1260 and 1261 of 2023 under Sec. 200 Cr.P.C. read with Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Fifth Court, Mangalore. However, by order dtd. 12/12/2023, the learned Magistrate returned the complaint cases for presentation before the jurisdictional Court, stating that the drawee bank was Kotak Mahindra Bank at Mumbai and, therefore, his Court had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint cases.