LAXMI TRADING CORPORATION Vs. PEC LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this common order, I propose to decide the above mentioned petitions filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C challenging inter alia the impugned common order dated 24th March, 2015 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Special Judge (PC Act) (CBI)-6, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in Criminal Revision Nos. 6/2015, 11/2015, 10/2015,9/2015 upholding the order dated 29th October, 2014 passed by Civil Judge-01/ MM, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in Complaint Case Nos. 16/2013 and 78/2013, 261/2013, 17/2013, 41/2013 whereby the prayer of the petitioners for returning the Complaint Cases was rejected in view of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Dashrat Rupsingh Rathod Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr, 2014 9 SCC 129.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners were summoned for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with Section 142 of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act'). Thereafter, notices under Section 251 Cr.P.C were served upon the petitioners. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Thereafter the matter was posted for cross examination of CW1/complainant's witnesses. Many adjournments were obtained for the purposes of cross examination. The question of territorial jurisdiction was raised by the petitioners immediately when the judgment of Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod was rendered by the Supreme Court. The main contentions of the petitioners are that the drawee bank is situated in Mumbai and also the stage of recording of evidence under Section 145 (2) of the Act has yet not commenced, therefore the complaint is liable to be returned to the complainant for filing in the Court who has competent jurisdiction to try the same.

(3.) The trial court rejected the plea of the petitioners by order dated 29th November, 2014. The said order was challenged by the petitioners on filing of Revision Petitions on the grounds that Metropolitan Magistrate did not consider the legal position in a proper manner and the same was incorrectly passed without appreciation of law and facts.