NAVINABHAI RASIKAL SHAH Vs. KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Petitioner, who is accused in CC No. 102097 of 2009 (PCR No. 71921 of 2009), pending on the file of the learned XIV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayo Hall, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as to "ACMM" for short) has sought for quashing of the entire proceedings in the said case.

(2.) Though this matter is listed today for admission, having regard to the nature of relief sought for, it is taken for final disposal by the consent of the learned Advocates for both the sides, and their arguments are heard on merits. Perused the averments in the complaint and also the sworn statement recorded by the learned ACMM while issuing the process against the Petitioner-accused for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

(3.) Mr. Satyanarayana Chalke, the learned Counsel for the Petitioner-accused strongly contends that the Petitioner-accused has been residing at Mumbai in the State of Maharashtra, he obtained loan from the complainant's Bank at Mumbai, the cheque in question is said to have been issued by the accused on his account maintained by him at Mumbai, the said cheque came to be dishonoured by the complainant's Bank at Mumbai and, therefore, the Trial Court at Bangalore has no jurisdiction to entertain the said complaint and issue process against the Petitioner-accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.