GORE LAL JAIN Vs. RAM CHAND DHIR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE parties herein as the complainant petitioner alleges, executed an agreement for sale of some property at Ludhiana. According to the complainant -petitioner, the accused respondent made certain interpolations therein. On the basis thereof he filed a complaint in the Court of Shri H.C. Singla Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jagron. The learned Magistrate issued process to the respondent. The respondent then made an application challenging the jurisdiction of the Court territorially. His case was that since the offence ostensibly was committed at Ludhiana, therefore, the Ludhiana Court had jurisdiction to try the case. The learned Magistrate rejected the application, taking the view that it was from the evidence alone that it would emerge, which Court had the jurisdiction. He thus kept the matter pending. Aggrieved against that order the respondent filed a revision petition before the Court of Session. Shri O.P. Dharwal, Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana vide the impugned order accepted the revision petition, as in his view sufficient evidence had appeared on the record to justify the conclusion that the Court at Ludhiana had the jurisdiction. Instead of transferring the complaint to the Court at Ludhiana, he dismissed the complaint, holding that the Jagraon Court had not been invested with the territorial jurisdiction. It is this view of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, which is the subject of challenge in this petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, but legally speaking, it is a revision by itself, for a second revision lies in these circumstances. See in this connection Section 397 (3), Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) THE petitioner has raised a number of points to challenge this view taken by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. But I am of the view that justice of the case lies in not relegating the petitioner to the step of filing a fresh complaint, but to transfer the case itself to a competent Court at Ludhiana. After all it cannot be ignored that there was no inherent lack of jurisdiction for the trial of the complaint. The question of jurisdiction pertaining to territoriality, though raisable, is not always fatal to the case. It depends on lot of factors some of which are forthcoming in section 462, Code of Criminal Procedure. In this view of the matter, the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is partially modified to the extent that his order dismissing the complaint, is quashed and the complaint is transferred to the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, who may try it himself or transfer it to another Magistrate of competent jurisdiction. The parties through their counsel are directed to put in appearance before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, on 29th March, 1985. Ordered accordingly. Order accordingly.