Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2024 DIGILAW 1118 (SC)

Anil Srivastava v. Balram Gupta

2024-11-08

ABHAY S.OKA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

body2024
ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. The appellants are the accused in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the N.I. Act’) filed by the first respondent. By order dated 26th April, 2024, the learned Magistrate (Metropolitan Magistrate, North East Karkardooma Courts, Delhi) directed the first respondent to take steps to transfer this complaint to the proper court having jurisdiction at Banda, U.P. Therefore, the learned Magistrate passed the following order: “7. In terms of above discussion, the present matter is hereby adjourned sine die with liberty to the complainant to take all necessary steps for getting the present matter transferred to the proper Court having jurisdiction at Banda, U.P. 8. Other pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. It is hereby made clear that in case complainant fails to take necessary steps for getting the present matter transferred from this Court to the jurisdictional court of Banda, U.P. within a period of 6 months from today then the matter shall be deemed to be dismissed as withdrawn.” 4. Learned Counsel representing the appellants who are the accused states that it is not their case that the court in which complaint filed by the first respondent is pending has no jurisdiction to entertain and try. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants, in fact, submitted that the prayer of the appellants is that the complaint should be disposed of by the same court in accordance with law. 6. As the issue of jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate did not arise, there are no warrant for passing the order dated 26th April, 2024. Accordingly, we set aside the order dated 26th April, 2024 passed by the learned Magistrate and direct that the Court of the learned Magistrate shall proceed to decide the complaint in accordance with law and there is no need to consider the issue of territorial jurisdiction of the said court. 7. In view of this direction, the Writ Petition (Criminal) No.2027 of 2024 filed by the appellants before the Delhi High Court does not survive and the same is accordingly disposed of. 8. 7. In view of this direction, the Writ Petition (Criminal) No.2027 of 2024 filed by the appellants before the Delhi High Court does not survive and the same is accordingly disposed of. 8. We clarify that notwithstanding setting aside the order dated 26th April, 2024, the application made by the appellant under Section 340 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 will remain pending which shall be considered at the time of final hearing of the complaint. 9. The appeal is disposed of on above terms. 10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.