(1.) By this common judgement, the writ petition and criminal revision applications noted above are being decided together in as much as questions of law and facts involved therein are of identical nature.
(2.) A brief resume of background facts in the context of Writ Petition (Cri. W.P. No.497/2008) may be stated. The petitioner and the respondent - M/s. Videocon Industries Ltd. were having transactions. The petitioner is proprietor of M/s. Monisha Agency. The respondent is a multinational company. One of its branch office is at Bhubneshwar. The petitioner used to purchase goods from the respondent's branch at Bhubneshwar. The petitioner allegedly isstied a cheque dated 5-6-2006 for Rs. 3,00,000/- (rupees three lacs) in favour of Videocon International Ltd. The cheque was drawn on UCO Bank. The cheque was presented by the respondent in State Bank of India, Ahmednagar for encashment. It was sent by the said Bank to the drawee Bank i.e. UCO Bank, branch at Tangi (Orissa) for realization. The cheque was dishonoured by the payee Bank with remark "funds insufficient". The respondent issued demand notice dated 22-11-2006 to the petitioner by registered post. Inspite of service of the notice, the payment was not made within 15 days. Consequently, the respondent instituted a private complaint case (S.T.C. No. 8704/2006) against the petitioner for commission of offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
(3.) The petitioner filed an application (Exh-20) to dismiss the complaint for want of jurisdiction. The petitioner contended before the learned Magistrate that his place of business is at Chandpur (Orissa). The transactions were with branch of the respondent (complainant) at Bhubneshwar (Orissa). The cheque was issued at Chandpur (Orissa) and was dishonoured within the territorial jurisdiction of the Criminal Court at Khurda (Orissa) or Bhubneshwar, but on basis of fake cause of action, the criminal complaint was instituted in the Court at Ahmednagar.