SURENDER KUMAR AGGARWAL Vs. SATYAPAL VARSHNEYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeals Nos. 180-A, 180-B, 180-C, 180-D and 180-E of 1973. They arise out of common facts:-

(2.) Satyapal Varshneya, respondent herein, a publisher and bookseller of Chandni Chowk, Delhi made complaints in the Court of Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Paharganj, Delhi against Surender Kumar Aggarwal appellant herein resident of Allahabad, Om Parkash Sharma, resident of Meerut and one other alleging the commission of an offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The Magistrate examined the complainant under Section 200, Criminal Procedure Code and thereafter issued summonses to the accused. The accused persons appeared before the Magistrate and made an application under Section 177, Criminal Procedure Code alleging that the Magistrate had no territorial jurisdiction to hear the complaint as the alleged offences were not committed within the limits of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. The Magistrate overruled the objections. Surender Kumar Aggarwal and his co-accused filed revision petitions (414 to 418 of 1971) in the Court of Session. The Revisions were heard by the Additional Sessions Judge who reported these cases to the High Court of Delhi with the recommendation, that since the material so far on record did not disclose that the alleged offence was committed within the jurisdiction of the Magistrate, the orders of the Magistrate be quashed and the complaints dismissed. In the alternative he recommended that the trial court be directed to treat the objection raised by the petitioner as a preliminary one and dispose it of on merits after affording an opportunity to the complainant to adduce further evidence in the matter.

(3.) A learned Judge of the High Court by a common judgment dated March 9, 1972 accepted this alternative recommendation of the Additional Sessions Judge, and disposed of the Revisions accordingly.