1. The Punjab Tractors Limited, a Company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Phase IV, Industrial Area, S.A.S. Nagar-Mohali, Chandigarh, and Mahindra and Mahindra Limited, a Company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1913, having its registered office at Gateway Building, Appollo Bunder, Mumbai, with which the former is stated to have merged, filed various Complaints before Judicial Magistrates at Srinagar against their Dealers for proceeding against them for dishonour of Cheques that they are stated to have issued to discharge their existing liability of the money payable for the Tractors, Spare Parts and Accessories which they had purchased on credit from the two Companies, and non-payment of the amount covered thereby, despite Notice. 2. Taking cognizance on the Complaints of the Companies, the herein respondents, the learned Magistrates jsued process against the petitioners, the Dealers of the Companies. 3. Aggrieved by the process issued by the learned Magistrates, the petitioners-Dealers have filed these Petitions seeking quashing of the proceedings initiated on the respondents' Complaints. 4. The details of the Cheques, the Places of the drawal thereof, the Names of the Collecting Banks, the Places from where Notices were issued by the respondents, and the Places where these were intended to be served, are given hereunder in the following Tabular Form. S.No.     Description Amount Places at Name of Date of Place Places of the Petitions. covered by the which the Cheques   the Notice in terms of from where the notice was dishonoured   were drawn Collecting Clause (b) where intended to   Cheques banks of Proviso the be to Section notice delivered/  138 served was issued   1. 561 -A No. Cheque No. Canara J&K Bank Notice Srinagar Saharanpur   69/2010 773383 dtd. Bank, Court Ltd., Air dated   (UP), Kalpatru 15.01.2009 Road Cargo 03.09.2009   Haridwai Krishi for Rs. 20.00 Saharanpur Branch, (Uttrakhand)   Kendra & lac Branch Srinagar & Ors. v. P.mchkuia Mahindra & (Haryana)   Mahindra Ltd.   2. 561-ANo. Cheque No. Bank of J&K Bank Notice Srinagar Ankleshwar   22/2010 946462 Baroda, Ltd., Air dated   (Gujarat) Sailesh dated Industrial Cargo 27.11.2009   Sanghvi v. 30.06.2009 estate Branch, Punjab for Rs. 8.00 Branch, Srinagar   Tractor Ltd. lac Bharuch   i -----------------   3. 561-ANo. Cheque No. Punjab J&K Bank Notice Srinagar Cuddapah   50/2009 920801 National Ltd., dated (A.P). Bhoomi dated Bank   Residency 11.12.2008 Putra Centre 30.9.2008 for Cuddapah Road, v. Punjab Rs. (A.P.)   Srinagar Tractors Ltd. 40,58,000/-   4. 8.00 Branch, Srinagar   Tractor Ltd. lac Bharuch   i -----------------   3. 561-ANo. Cheque No. Punjab J&K Bank Notice Srinagar Cuddapah   50/2009 920801 National Ltd., dated (A.P). Bhoomi dated Bank   Residency 11.12.2008 Putra Centre 30.9.2008 for Cuddapah Road, v. Punjab Rs. (A.P.)   Srinagar Tractors Ltd. 40,58,000/-   4. 561-ANo. Cheque No. State Bank J&K Bank Notice Srinagar Karimnagar  58/2009 0611568 of Ltd., dated (A.P). T.Laxma dated Hyderabad Residency 10.01.2009   Reddy v. 30.10.2008 1 vlankammath Road, Punjab for Rs. 70.00 ota Branch   Srinagar Tractor Ltd. Lac karim Nagar   HC-476 JK JUDGMENTS  5. 561-ANo. Cheque No. 1 ICICI Bank J&K Bank Notice Srinagar Karimnapar   57/2009 T. 912770 Ltd. Ltd., dated   (A.P). '   Laxma dated jjecunderabac Residency 31.10.2008   Reddy v. 20.10.2008 Branch Road, Punjab   Rs. 70.00 Lac   Snnagar Tractor Ltd. And anr. 6. 561-A No. Cheque No. Punjab J&K Bank Notice Srinagar   Cuddapah 55/2009 920804 National Ltd., dated   (A.P). M/S dated Bank Residency   17.06.2008 bhoomi 28.02.2008 Cuddapah(A. Road,   - Putra for Rs. 10.00 P) Srinagar Tractor Lac   Centre v. Punjab Tractors Ltd.   7. 561-ANo. Cheque No. State Bank J&K Bank Notice   Srinagar Mancherial 49/2009 0955212 of Ltd. dated   (A.P)       M/SSriSai   dated   Hyderabad,   Residency   16.12.2008       Agro   20.10.2008   /lankammath   Road,       Agencies v.   for Rs. 70.00   ota branch,   Srinagar       Punjab   Lac   Karim       Tractors Ltd.     Nagar (A.P)     8. 561-ANo.   Cheque No.   Union Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Mehsana i       123/2009   0248567   of India   Ltd.,   dated     (Gujarat) 1       Srikant   dated   Mehsana   Residency   06.02.2009 |       Jadhav &   30.11.2008   (Gujarat)   Road,     ors. v.   for Rs. 80.00   Branch   Srinagar       Punjab   Lac     Tractors       9. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Karimnagar       55/201 IT. 619686   of   Ltd., Air   dated   (A.P). Laxma   dated   Hyderabad   Cargo   28.07.2009     Reddy v.   15.12.2008   lankommath   Srinagar       Mahindra   for Rs. 50.00   ota Branch       and   Lac     Mahindra       1       Ltd.       j,     10. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice Srinagar I Kolar (A.P;     56/2011   206408   of India   Ltd.y dated     M/sPrabha   dated   Kolar   Residency   14.02.2009       Tractor   20.10.2008 Branch,   Road,       Agencies   for Rs. (A.P). Srinagar       and ors. v.   22,22,000/-       Mahindra       and     Mahindra       Ltd.       It   561-A No.   Cheque No.   State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Karimnagar       57/201 IT. 211670   of   Ltd.,   dated     (A.P). Laxma   dated   Hyderabad   Residency   15.12.2008     Reddy v.   20.10.2008   dankommath   Road,     Punjab   for Rs. 25.00   ota Branch,   Srinagar     Tractor and   Lac   Karim     ors. Nagar (A.P)       12. 561-A No. 61/2010 M/sGoyal and sons v. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd.   Cheque No. 385250 dated 30.12.2008 for Rs. 211670   of   Ltd.,   dated     (A.P). Laxma   dated   Hyderabad   Residency   15.12.2008     Reddy v.   20.10.2008   dankommath   Road,     Punjab   for Rs. 25.00   ota Branch,   Srinagar     Tractor and   Lac   Karim     ors. Nagar (A.P)       12. 561-A No. 61/2010 M/sGoyal and sons v. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd.   Cheque No. 385250 dated 30.12.2008 for Rs. 24,25,000/-   State Bank of India Barnal Branch (Pb). J&K Bank Ltd., Air Cargo Branch, Srinagar   Notice dated 25.07.2009   Srinagar   Barnala (Pb) and Panchkula (Haryana). 13. 561 -A No. 25/2010 M/S Aggarwal & Co. v. Punjab Tractor Ltd.   Cheque No. 015427 dtd 28.2.2008 for Rs. 20.00 Lac   UTIBank Ltd., Jaipur, Moondra Bhavan, 3-Ajmer Road, Jaipur Branch   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 25.04.2008 issued from Srinagar   Srinagar   Tonk and Jaipur (Rajasthan)     14. 561-A No. 55/2010 M/SR.K. Tractors v. Punjab Tractors   Cheque No. 790362 dated 15.09.2008 for Rs. 30.00 Lac   Bank of Maharashtra, Gurgaon Branch Haryana   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 04.11.2008   Srinagar   Gurgaon  (Haryana)  1     15. 561-A Nq. 33/2010 M/SR. K. Tractors v. Punjab Tractors Ltd.   Cheque No. 790361 dated 28.02.2008 for Rs. 15.00 Lac   Bank of Maharashtra, Gurgaon (Haryana) Branch   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 26.04.2008   Srinagar   Gurgaon  (Haryana)     16. 561 -A No. 34/2010 M/S R.K. Tractors v. Punjab Tractors Ltd.   Cheque No. 790363 dated 30.09.2008 for Rs. 83,46,000/-   Bank of Maharashtra, Gurgaon Branch Haryana   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 15.12.2008   Srinagar   Gurgaon  (Haryana)     17. 561-A No. 86/2009 Divya Agro Service & ors. v. Punjab Tractor Ltd.   Cheque No 218809 dated 25.09.2008 for Rs. 80.00 1 Lac   State Bank of India, Bhoothpur Distt. ahabubnaga r Branch (A.P)   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 08.12.2008   Srinagar   Jadcherla  (M) dahabubnaga,  r(A.P). i j     18. 561-A No. 85/2009 M/S Bhawani Agencies & ors. v. Punjab Tractors Ltd.   Cheque No. 125259 dated 20.10.2008 for Rs. 62,70,000/-   Union Bank of India, Nirmal-504106 (A.P.) Branch   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 13.01.2009   Srinagar   Adilabad and Karimnagar  (A.P)  I  i     19. 561-A No. 47/2009 M/s. Sri Thakqravarth i v. Punjab Tractors Ltd.   Cheque No. 242611 dated 15.05.2007 for Rs. 10.00 Lac   Union Bank of India Orlgole  (A.P.)   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 28.08.2007   Srinagar   Ongole (A P). 21. 561-A No.   Cheque No, State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar Mahabubnagai       72/2011   529326   of India,   Ltd., Air   dated   r(A.P)       Divya Agro   dated   Bhoothpur   Cargo   29.06.2009           Service &   15.12.2008   Branch   Branch,             ors. v.   forRs. 10.00 Lac   Union Bank of India Orlgole  (A.P.)   J&K Bank Ltd., Residency Road, Srinagar   Notice dated 28.08.2007   Srinagar   Ongole (A P). 21. 561-A No.   Cheque No, State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar Mahabubnagai       72/2011   529326   of India,   Ltd., Air   dated   r(A.P)       Divya Agro   dated   Bhoothpur   Cargo   29.06.2009           Service &   15.12.2008   Branch   Branch,             ors. v.   forRs. Mahabub   Sri nagar             Mahindra   39,20,000/-   nagar (A.P)               and                   Mahindra                   Ltd.                 22. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Kolar (A P       48/2009   206441   of India   Ltd.,   dated |         M/s Prabha   dated   Kolar   Residency   03.09.2008           Tractor   15.06.2008   Branch   Road,             Agencies   for Rs. (A.P). Srinagar             and ors. v.   20,00,000/-                 Punjab                   Tractor Ltd.                 23. 561 -A No.   Cheque No.   Punjab   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Bilaspur       32/2010   146307   National   Ltd.,   dated     (H.P)       M/SPayal   dated   Bank   Residency   15.12.2008           Automobiles   20.10.2008   Bilaspur   Road,             & anr v.   for Rs. 50.00   (H.P) Branch   Srinagar           Punjab   Lac                 Tractor Ltd.                 24. 561 -A No.   Cheque No.   Punjab   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Bilaspur i       35/2010   146308   National   Ltd., dated (H.P)       M/S Payal   dated   Bank   Residency i3.01.2009 j       Automobiles   30.10.2008   Bilaspur   Road,       & anr. v.   on for Rs. (M.P) Branch   Srinagar       Punjab   50.00 Lac             Tractor Ltd.             25. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State bank   J&K Bank Notice   Srinagar   Markapur ;       5/2010 M/S   732820   of India,   Ltd., Air   dated     (A.P)       Sri Balaji   dated   Markapur   Cargo   19.03.2009           Auto   30.10.2008   (A.P) Branch   Branch,             Agencies v.   foe Rs. Srinagar             Mahindra &   49,15,000/-                 Mahindra                   Ltd.                 26. 561 -A No.   Cheque No.   State bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Barnala 9       28/2010   132277   of Patiala   Ltd., Air   dated     (Pb.) and       M/sGoyal   dated   S.C.O 125-   Cargo   02.04.2009     Panchkula       and sons   15.12.2008   126 Sector   Branch,     1 (Haryana)       anr. v.   for Rs. 5.00   17 C,   Srinagar             Mahindra   Lac   Chandigarh               and     branch               Mahindra                   Ltd.                 27. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar Barnala 9       27/2010   053232   of Patiala 17   Ltd., Air   dated     (Pb.) and       M/s Goyal   dated   C,   Cargo,   07.03.2009     Panchkula       and sons &   15.12:2008   Chandigarh   Srinagar       (Haryana)       anr. v.   for Rs. 5.00   branch               Mahindra   Lac                 and                   Mahindra                   Ltd.                 28. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   Canara   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Vidisha       106/2010   004041   Bank   Ltd.,   dated   1   (M.P)       M/s   dated   Vidisha   Residency   21.06.2008           Vidisha   30.04.2008   Branch (M.P)   Road,             Agriculture   Rs.10.00 Lac     Srinagar             Industries                   and Anr. v.                   Punjab                   Tractors Ltd.             '     29. v.   for Rs. 5.00   branch               Mahindra   Lac                 and                   Mahindra                   Ltd.                 28. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   Canara   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Vidisha       106/2010   004041   Bank   Ltd.,   dated   1   (M.P)       M/s   dated   Vidisha   Residency   21.06.2008           Vidisha   30.04.2008   Branch (M.P)   Road,             Agriculture   Rs.10.00 Lac     Srinagar             Industries                   and Anr. v.                   Punjab                   Tractors Ltd.             '     29. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   Punjab   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Bilaspur       68/2010   146306   National   Ltd.,   dated     (H.P)       M/SPayal   dated   Bank,   Residency   11.12.2008     i       Automobiles   30.09.2008   Bilaspur   Road,-       :  I       & anr. v.   for Rs. 50.00   (HP) Branch   Srinagar             Punjab   Lac                 Tractors Ltd.     . 30. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Barnala       108/2010   774823   of India   Ltd., Air   dated     (Pb.)&       M/sGoyal   dated   Barnala   Cargo   15.06.2009     Panchkula       and Sons &   30.11.2008   Branch   Branch,       (Haryana) j       anr. v.   for Rs. 20.00     Srinagar             Mahindra   Lac                 and                   Mahindra                   Ltd.             \                 I       31. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State Bank   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Barnala       65/2010   774822   of India   Ltd., Air   dated     (Pb.)&       M/sGoyal   dated   Barnala   Cargo,   15.06.2009     Panchkula       and sons &   30.11.2008   Branch (Pb.)   Srinagar       (Haryana)       anr. v.   for Rs. 20.00                 Mahindra   Lac                 and                   Mahindra                   Ltd.                 32. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   State Bank   J&K Bank   _ Notice   Srinagar   Barnala       36/2010   774824   of India   Ltd., Air   dated     (Pb.) &       M/sGoyal   dated   Barnala   Cargo,   15.06.2009     Panchkula       and sons &   30.11.2008   Branch (Pb.)   Srinagar       (Haryana)       anr. v.   for Rs. 20.00                 Mahindra   Lac                 and             1       Mahindra             i       Ltd                               "I     33. 561-A No.   Cheque No.   Canara   J&K Bank   Notice   Srinagar   Vidisha       107/2010   592438   Bank   Ltd.,   dated     (M.P)       M/s   dated   Vidisha   Residency   11.12.2008     j       Vidisha   20.09.2008   Branch   Road,       i       Agriculture   for Rs. Srinagar             Industry &   24,04,000/-           i       anr. v.                   Punjab                   Tractors Ltd. 5. The petitioners question the jurisdiction of the learned Magistrates at Srinagar to entertain the respondents' Complaints and issue process thereon, when the Transactions had taken place, the Cheques drawn and the places where Notices under Clause (b) of the Proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, were sought to be delivered/served, were situated outside the State of Jarnmu and Kashmir. 6. Responding to the petitioners' challenge to the jurisdiction of the learned Magistrates to issue process against the respondents, the respondents' learned counsel submitted that the Notice(s) of Demand, in terms of the provisions of Clause (b) to the Proviso appended to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,. 6. Responding to the petitioners' challenge to the jurisdiction of the learned Magistrates to issue process against the respondents, the respondents' learned counsel submitted that the Notice(s) of Demand, in terms of the provisions of Clause (b) to the Proviso appended to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,. 'the Act', for short, having been issued from Srinagar, the learned Magistrates at Srinagar had the jurisdictional competence to entertain the Complaints and proceed against the petitioners on the respondents' Complaints. 7. As common question of law, as to whether or not the Judicial Magistrates at Srinagar had the jurisdiction to entertain the respondents' Complaints for proceeding against the petitioners, arose in all these cases, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 8. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties at the Bar, the issue that arises for determination is as follows:- "Is it the Place of issuance of Notice, in terms of the provisions of Clause (b) of the Proviso to Section 138 of the Act, or the Place where the Notice was intenaed to be served on the Drawer of the Cheque, that determines the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to issue process on a Complaint for dishonor of Cheque and non-payment of the amount covered thereby within the period prescribed under Section 138 of the Act". 9. The information appearing in Paragraph No.4 (supra) reveals that all the Cheques, on the dishonour whereof the process was issued against the petitioners, were drawn and dishonoured by the Concerned Banks, at places without the State of Jammu and Kashmir. It further appears that although all the Notices in terms of the provisions of Section 138 (b) were issued from Srinagar but these were intended to be served at places located outside the State. 10. In the light of the above admitted factual position as it emerges from the respondents' Complaints and the petitioners' Petitions, I would proceed to determine the issue in question, and for that purpose would refer to the provisions of Section 138 of the Act in the first instance. Section 138 of the Act reads thus:- "138. 10. In the light of the above admitted factual position as it emerges from the respondents' Complaints and the petitioners' Petitions, I would proceed to determine the issue in question, and for that purpose would refer to the provisions of Section 138 of the Act in the first instance. Section 138 of the Act reads thus:- "138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc., of funds in the account,-Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provisions of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for [a term which may extended to two years], or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless- (a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier; (b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, [within thirty days] of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or, as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice. Explanation:- For the purposes of this section, "debt or other liability" means a legally enforceable debt or other liability.]" 11. Explanation:- For the purposes of this section, "debt or other liability" means a legally enforceable debt or other liability.]" 11. Perusal of the provisions of the above Section reveals that dishonour of any Cheque by a Bank on which it was drawn, for any amount payable for discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability for insufficiency of funds, or exceeding the arrangement for operation of the account, may give rise to the commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act, Only if, (i) The Cheque was presented within a period of six months from the date on which it was drawn, or within the period of its validity. (ii) The payee or the holder in due course of the Cheque, makes a demand for the payment of the amount covered by the Cheque by giving a Notice in writing to the drawer of the Cheque within thirty days of the receipt of information by him from the Bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (iii) The Drawer of such Cheque fails to make the payment to the Payee or to the holder in due course of the Cheque within fifteen days of the receipt of Notice. 12. In other words, the offence comes into being, on the completion, in succession of the following acts and omissions:- 1) Drawing of Cheque for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of the account maintained with the Bank for discharge of any debt or other liability. 2) Presentation of the Cheque to the Drawee bank. 3) Return of the Cheque by the Drawee bank for insufficiency of amount or its exceeding the amount arranged to be paid from the account. 4) Giving of Notice by the Payee or the Holder of the Cheque under Clause (b) of the Proviso to Section 138 to the Drawer for payment of the amount covered by the dishonoured Cheque, within thirty days of the receipt of information on return of the Cheque. 5) Failure of the Drawer to make the payment within fifteen days of the receipt of Notice. 13. In view of the above legal position, the offence under Section 138 of the Act cannot be said to have committed, if one or the other five acts referred to herein above had not taken place. 14. 5) Failure of the Drawer to make the payment within fifteen days of the receipt of Notice. 13. In view of the above legal position, the offence under Section 138 of the Act cannot be said to have committed, if one or the other five acts referred to herein above had not taken place. 14. In these circumstances, when the offence is constituted only if five acts referred to herein above take place in succession, the question that would fall for consideration is as to which Court would have the jurisdiction to inquire into and try the offence if the place of occurrence of these acts were located at places falling in the jurisdiction of different local Magistrates. 15. To determine the issue, regard needs to be had to the provisions of law governing the jurisdiction of the Criminal Courts to inquire into and try such type of offences commission whereof was dependent on completion of number of acts or omissions, in that, provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act do not deal with the issue in question. Reference, therefore, needs to be made to the provisions of Section 182 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the solitary Provision that deals with such a situation. It reads thus:- "182. Place of inquiry or trial where scene of offence is uncertain or not in one district only; or where offence is continuing, or consists of several acts When it is uncertain in which of several local areas an offence was committed, or Where an offence is committed partly in one local area and partly in another; or where an offence is a continuing one; and continues to be committed in more local areas than one; or where it consists of several acts done in different local areas; it may be inquired into or tried by a Court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas." 16. The above provisions of Section 182 of the Code indicate that the Magistrate(s) of the local area(s) where any one or the other of several acts that constitute an offence, had taken place, Would have the jurisdiction to inquire into, or try the offence complained against. 17. The above provisions of Section 182 of the Code indicate that the Magistrate(s) of the local area(s) where any one or the other of several acts that constitute an offence, had taken place, Would have the jurisdiction to inquire into, or try the offence complained against. 17. In view of the above provisions of Section 182, all the Magistrate(s) of the local area(s) within whose jurisdiction any one or the other acts that constitute the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Act, had taken place, would have the jurisdiction to inquire into or try the offence punishable under Section 138. 18. The next and crucial question that needs consideration is as to whether the Magistracy at Srinagar from where the Notice(s) under Clause (b) of the Proviso to Section 138 of the Act were issued, had the jurisdiction to inquire into and try the Complaints of the respondents in view of the provisions of Section 182 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 19. Although on the first blush, the proposition propounded by the respondents' learned counsel that Notice in terms of Clause (b) of the Proviso appended to Section 138 of the Act having been issued from Srinagar, the Magistrates at Srinagar would also have the jurisdiction to initiate process against the petitioners, regardless of the fact that other acts requisite for constitution of offence, had taken place outside the State of Jammu and Kashmir, looked attractive, but on deeper consideration, it appeared that such interpretation of the provisions of Section 182 of the Code was not intended by the Framers of the law, for, it was likely to result in miscarriage of justice, in that, such interpretation was likely to be misused by unscrupulous litigants, as a handle to abuse the process of Criminal Courts, in dragging the Drawer of a Cheque, in the event of its dishonour, for one or the other reason(s), in any part of the Country, on mere issuance of Notice under Section 138 of the Act, from a far off place although neither the transaction between the parties, nor any liability arising therefrom had been conceived, contemplated or taken place in that part of the Country from where the Notice was issued. 20. 20. It, therefore, becomes necessary to appreciate as to whether issuance of Notice alone, without considering its intended Place of receipt/delivery, would amount to one of the acts or omissions, in terms of the provisions of Section 182 of the Code that may be said vesting jurisdiction in the Magistrate of that local area from where the Notice was issued, with the jurisdiction to issue process for commission of offence under Section 138 of the Act. 21. As indicated elsewhere in the judgment, it is the completion of five acts in succession that constituted the office punishable under Section 138 of the Act, so the act of issuance of Notice alone may not, of itself, be sufficient to confer jurisdiction in the Magistrate of the local area from where it was issued, unless the place of its receipt was also within the jurisdiction of the Magistrate, The issuance of Notice under Section 138 of the Act, may not, even otherwise, be of any significance unless it was received or presumed to be received by the drawer of the Cheque, for, the last ingredient requisite to constitute the offence would be complete only if payment covered by the dishonoured Cheque was not made within fifteen days of the receipt of Notice. 22. This apart, in terms of the provisions of Section 182 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is the act or omission of the accused and not that of the Complainant alone that may be relevant to determine the place of jurisdiction for inquiry or trial of the offence that comes into being on completion of number of acts. 23. The offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, cannot, therefore, be conceived unless there was inter alia either a presumption of receipt of Notice under Section 138 of the Act by the Accused or its actual receipt by him, and non-payment of the amount demanded in the Notice within the statutory period prescribed therefor. The issuance of Notice from a place alone would not, therefore, of itself vest jurisdiction in the local Magistrate from whose jurisdiction the Notice was issued, to inquire into or try the offence unless the Notice was received and its payment refused within his jurisdiction. 24. The issuance of Notice from a place alone would not, therefore, of itself vest jurisdiction in the local Magistrate from whose jurisdiction the Notice was issued, to inquire into or try the offence unless the Notice was received and its payment refused within his jurisdiction. 24. Therefore, keeping in view the provisions of Section 182 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in terms whereof, it is the place of accused's act or omission, that may also determine the place of inquiry or trial of an offence commission whereof depends on the happening of various acts or omissions in the jurisdiction of one or other Magistrates, the place from where the Notice under Section 138 (b) of the Act was issued, alone may not vest in the Magistrate from whose jurisdiction the Notice was issued, jurisdiction to inquire into and try the offence under Section 138 of the Act unless the place where the notice was intended to be served/delivered, was also within his jurisdiction. 25. The issuance of Notice by the respondents for dishonour of Cheques drawn and presented for payment to the concerned Banks located outside the State of Jammu and Kashmir, from Srinagar would not, therefore, vest any jurisdiction in the Magistrate at Srinagar to entertain the respondents' Complaints for initiation of proceedings against the petitioners, when the Notices were intended to be served at places outside the State of Jammu and Kashmir and all other acts too had not taken place in any part of the State of Jammu & Kashmir. 26. The view taken by this Court in Srikant Yadhav and anr. v. Punjab Tractors Limited may not be of any help to the respondents, for, the Court had not taken into consideration the provisions of Section 182 of the Code of Criminal Procedure while determining the question of jurisdiction of a Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Act. 27. The view which I have taken in these cases is supported by another judgment of this Court in M/s. Rohit Motors and anr. v. M/s. Punjab Tractors Limited reported as 2010 (2) JKJ [HC] 894, SLJ 2010193. 28. For all what has been said above, the process issued by the learned Magistrates at Srinagar against the petitioners, on the respondents' Complaints, is, therefore, without jurisdiction and illegal. 29. v. M/s. Punjab Tractors Limited reported as 2010 (2) JKJ [HC] 894, SLJ 2010193. 28. For all what has been said above, the process issued by the learned Magistrates at Srinagar against the petitioners, on the respondents' Complaints, is, therefore, without jurisdiction and illegal. 29. These Petitions, therefore, succeed and are, accordingly, allowed quashing the process issued by the learned Magistrates on respondents' Complaints. The Complaints filed by the respondents against the petitioners shall stand dismissed.