Delhi District Court
Cr No. 382/2018 vs The State And Others on 31 May, 2019
IN THE COURT OF SH. RAKESH SYAL, ASJ-03,
NEW DELHI DISTRICT, PATIALA HOUSE COURTS,
NEW DELHI
1. CR No. 382/2018, State Bank of India(Petitioner) v/s
The State and Others (Respondents), arising out of CC No.
8004/2017, State Bank of India v/s The State and Others,
2. CR No. 383/2018 State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
The State and Others (Respondents) arising out of CC No.
8012/2017 State Bank of India v/s The State and Others,
3. CR No. 384/2018 State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
The State and Others (Respondents) arising out of CC No.
8007/2017 State Bank of India v/s The State and Others,
4. CR No. 421/2018 State Bank of India(Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 5711/2017 State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
5. CR No. 422/2018 State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7237/2017 State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
6. CR No. 423/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7235/2017 State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
7. CR No. 424/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 2525/2017 State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
8. CR No. 425/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
Page 1 of 24
No. 3752/2017 State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
9. CR No. 426/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 2523/2017 State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
10. CR No. 427/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 5709/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
11. CR No. 428/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 3751/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
12. CR No. 429/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 2227/2017 State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
13. CR No. 430/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 3753/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
14. CR No. 431/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 4420/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
15. CR No. 432/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 5713/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
16. CR No. 434/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
Page 2 of 24
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7233/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
17. CR No. 435/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7230/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
18. CR No. 436/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 4421/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
19. CR No. 437/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7238/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
20. CR No. 438/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7240/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
21. CR No. 439/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 2522/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
22. CR No. 440/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 3754/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
23. CR No. 441/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 4419/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
Page 3 of 24
24. CR No. 442/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7234/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
25. CR No. 443/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 4422/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
26. CR No. 444/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 2521/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street,
27. CR No. 445/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 7236/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street, and
28. CR No. 446/2018, State Bank of India (Petitioner) v/s
SHO, PS Parliament Street (Respondent) arising out of CC
No. 5714/2017, State Bank of India v/s SHO, PS Parliament
Street.
Date of filing of Revision petitions : 29-09-2018
at Serial No.s 1 to 3
Date of filing of Revision petitions : 04-10-2018
at Serial No.s 4 to 28
Date of arguments : 31-05-2019
Date of order : 31-05-2019
ORDER
1. This order shall dispose off the above 28 revision Page 4 of 24 petitions filed u/s 397 Cr.P.C. in which a common issue of law regarding jurisdiction of the trial court with respect to the allegations made in the complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and application u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C is involved.
2. In the aforesaid revision petitions, the petitioner State Bank of India (complaint before the Ld. Trial Court) has challenged the order dated 30.06.2018 vide which the revision petitions mentioned at serial no. 1, 2 and 3 and order dated 11.05.2018, of the Ld. Trial Court vide which revision petitions mentioned at serial no. 4 to 28 were directed to be returned to the petitioners on the ground that the said court does not have jurisdiction over the matters.
3. The brief common facts leading to filing of the revision petitions are that the petitioner/complainant bank is a statutory body corporate constituted under State Bank of India Act, 1955 having corporate office at Bank Bhawan, Madame Cama Road, Nariman point, Mumbai. The petitioner has branches throughout India. The petitioner also has Cheque Clearing and Processing Centre (hereinafter referred to as CCPC) at ground floor, B-Block, 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi. The banking activities of the petitioner are regulated by Reserve Bank of India. It is alleged that various cheques/draft of the account holders in different branches of the petitioner's bank which are subject matter of the aforesaid complaints u/s 200 Page 5 of 24 Cr.P.C. and the applications u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C., were manipulated/forged and presented in different banks in order to cheat the bank and its account holders. It is submitted that as per Cheque Truncation System clearing norms, the cheques/demand draft were retained by the collecting banks and only image of the same were sent to the petitioner for payment. There was no alternation, tampering or forgery apparent on the face of the image instrument. Thus, the cheques/demand draft in questions were passed by CTS in normal course of banking business. The fraud committed against the bank/customers came to the notice of the petitioner, when the account holder informed the petitioner bank about the incident.
4. As per the complaints, the details of the account holders bank/branch, the presenting banks, the cheques/demand draft in question and the clearance of such cheques/demand draft are as under:-
Sr. Case a) Bank/ Bank and Cheque Remarks no. particulars Branch of the branch cleared account where for holder cheques/ payment draft by
b) Cheque/ presented draft number/ date/amount as presented Page 6 of 24 and cleared
1. CR No. a) State Bank ICICI Bank State Draft not 382/2018 of India, Ltd. RPC, Bank of handed State Bank Dhata Delhi India, over. Only of India v. Branch, CCPC, photocopy The State Fatehpur, UP, Ground was sent.
and Ors. Floor, B-
b) Draft no. Block,
933166 11,
dated25.04.20 Sansad
16 for Rs.1 Marg,
lakh New
Delhi
2. CR no. a) State Bank State Bank State Cheque
383/2018, of India, of Patiala, Bank of actually
State Bank Overseas Chander India, issued for
of India v. Branch, New Lok CCPC, Rs.7,411/-
State and Delhi, Building, Ground but
ors., Jawahar Second Floor, B- Rs.3,85,000/
Vyapar Floor, 36, Block, - were
Bhawan, Janpath, 11, debited.
Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Sansad
New Delhi, Place, New Marg,
Delhi. New
b) Cheque no. Delhi
430558, dated
23.12.2012,
Rs.3,85,000/-
3. CR no. a) State Bank Bank of State Cheque
384/2018, of India, 14- Baroda, Bank of was issued
State Bank 15 Floor, Service India, in favour of
of India v. Jawahar Branch, CCPC, S.C.
State and Vyapar New Delhi Ground Vasudeva
Page 7 of 24
ors. Bhawan, 1 Floor, B- and Co.
Tolstoy Marg, Block, New Delhi
New Delhi, 11, but was
Sansad cleared in
b) Cheque no. Marg, favour of
959256, dated New accused no.
24.09.2014, Delhi 3 Waris
Rs.23,812- Khan.
4. CR no. a) State Bank Punjab State Cheque
421/2018, of India, National Bank of stolen.
State Bank Shivaji Park Bank, India,
of India v. Branch, Service CCPC,
SHO, PS Mumbai, Branch, Ground
Parliament New Delhi Floor, B-
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
871353 11,
dated Sansad
16.07.2014 Marg,
Rs. 3,10,000/- New
Delhi
5. CR no. a) State Bank Yes Bank State Cheque
422/2018, of India, Ltd. Bank of was
State Bank Navdapanth Service India, actually
of India v. Branch, Branch, CCPC, issued to
SHO, PS Indore New Delhi Ground SBI Life for
Parliament Floor, B- Rs.120/-.
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
842442 11,
dated Sansad
20.10.2013 Marg,
Rs.63,000/- New
Delhi
6. CR no. a) State Bank Co- State No such
Page 8 of 24
423/2018, of India, operation Bank of cheque was
State Bank Jharoda Bank, India, issued by
of India v. Kalan Service CCPC, the account
SHO, PS Branch, New Branch, Ground holder.
Parliament Delhi New Delhi Floor, B-
Street Block,
b) Cheque no. 11,
008440 Sansad
dated Marg,
28.07.2015 New
Rs.1,96,000/- Delhi
7. CR no. a) State Bank Punjab State Cheque
424/2018, of India, National Bank of was forged.
State Bank Special Bank, India,
of India v. Commercial Sahibabad CCPC,
SHO, PS Branch, Branch, Ground
Parliament Ludhiana, New Delhi Floor, B-
Street Block,
b) Cheque no. 11,
757971 Sansad
Dated Marg,
28.10.2010 New
Rs.1,56,060/- Delhi
8. CR no. a) State Bank Indus Ind State Cheque
425/2018, of India, Bank, Agra Bank of actually
State Bank Kakorbuzurg, Branch India, issued for
of India v. Auriya, UP CCPC, Rs.8,007/-.
SHO, PS Branch Ground
Parliament Floor, B-
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
633941 11,
dated Sansad
18.12.2015 Marg,
Page 9 of 24
Rs.60,007/- New
Delhi
9. CR no. a) State Bank Punjab State Cheque not
426/2018, of India, National Bank of issued by
State Bank Nirman Bank, India, the account
of India v. Bhawan Service CCPC, holder or
SHO, PS Branch, New Branch, Ground from his
Parliament Delhi New Delhi Floor, B- cheque
Street Block, book.
b) Cheque no. 11,
142056 Sansad
Dated Marg,
19.09.2016 New
Rs.8,74,000/- Delhi
10. CR no. a) State Bank HDFC Bank State Cheque not
427/2018, of India, Ltd. Service Bank of issued by
State Bank Nirman Branch, India, account
of India v. Bhawan New Delhi CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Branch, New Ground
Parliament Delhi Floor, B-
Street Block,
b) Cheque no. 11,
339661 Sansad
dated Marg,
19.11.2013 New
Rs.40,710/- Delhi
11. CR no. a) State Bank Punjab State Cheques
428/2018, of India, National Bank of not issued
State Bank SEEPZ Bank, India, by the
of India v. Branch, Nehru CCPC, account
SHO, PS Mumbai Place Ground holder.
Parliament Floor, B-
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
Page 10 of 24
189678 and 11,
dated Sansad
23.05.2016 Union Bank Marg,
Rs.1,94,000/- of India, New
Service Delhi
and Branch,
New Delhi
a) State Bank
of India,
SEEPZ
Branch,
Mumbai
b) Cheque no.
190086
dated
23.05.2016
Rs.2,31,000/-
12. CR no. a) State Bank IDBI Bank State No such
429/2018, of India, Service Bank of cheque
State Bank Katras Road, Branch, India, issued.
of India v. Dhanbad New Delhi CCPC, Cheque
SHO, PS Branch Ground actually
Parliament Floor, B- issued for
Street b) Cheque no. Block, Rs.30,636/-
239392 11, in favour of
dated Sansad Allahabad
19.05.2015 Marg, Bank.
Rs.3,50,400/- New
Delhi
13. CR no. a) State Bank HDFC Bank State Cheque not
430/2018, of India, Ltd., Noida Bank of issued by
Page 11 of 24
State Bank Shakagram India, the account
of India v. Khamdivalu CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS (E), Mumbai Ground
Parliament Branch Floor, B-
Street Block,
b) Cheque no. 11,
894777 Sansad
dated Marg,
28.10.2013 New
Rs.48,000/- Delhi
14. CR no. a) State Bank ICICI Bank State Cheque not
431/2018, of India, Ltd. Service Bank of issued by
State Bank Okhla Branch India, the account
of India v. Industrial CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Estate Ground
Parliament Branch, New Floor, B-
Street Delhi Block,
11,
b) Cheque no. Sansad
708439 Marg,
dated New
01.01.2016 Delhi
Rs.1,50,400/-
15. CR no. a) State Bank Deutsche State Cheque not
432/2018, of India, Bank, AG, Bank of issued by
State Bank Mansarovar Service India, the account
of India v. Garden, New Branch, CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Delhi New Delhi Ground
Parliament Floor, B-
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
919827 11,
dated Sansad
22.01.2015 Marg,
Page 12 of 24
Rs.60,454/- New
Delhi
16. CR no. a) State Bank Punjab State Cheques
434/2018, of India, PBB National Bank of not issued
State Bank Branch, New Bank, India, by the
of India v. Delhi Service CCPC, account
SHO, PS b) Cheque no. Branch, Ground holder.
Parliament 865113 New Delhi Floor, B-
Street dated Block,
09.11.2015 11,
Rs.10,000/- Sansad
and Cheque Marg,
no.865103 New
dated Delhi
19.11.15 for
Rs.15,000/-
17. CR no. a) State Bank Axis Bank State Cheque not
435/2018, of India, Ltd. Service Bank of issued.
State Bank Deccan Branch, India, It was
of India v. Gymkhana New Delhi CCPC, stolen.
SHO, PS Branch, Ground
Parliament Pune, Floor, B-
Street Maharashtra Block,
11,
b) Cheque no. Sansad
619063 Marg,
dated New
20.02.2016 Delhi
Rs.40,000/-
18. CR no. a) State Bank HDFC Bank State Cheque not
436/2018, of India, Siya Ltd. Service Bank of issued by
State Bank Ganj Branch, Branch, India, the account
of India v. Indore New Delhi CCPC, holder to
Page 13 of 24
SHO, PS Ground the payee
Parliament b) Cheque no. Floor, B- in whose
Street 701904 Block, account the
dated 11, amount
14.04.2016 Sansad was
Rs.95,156/- Marg, credited.
New
Delhi
19. CR no. a) State Bank State Bank State Cheques
437/2018, of India, of Bank of not issued
State Bank Santi Niketan Travancore India, by account
of India v. Branch, West Service CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Bengal Branch Ground Cheque no.
Parliament Floor, B- 363359
Street b) Cheque no. Block, actually
363359 11, issued for
dated Sansad Rs. 120/-
25.04.2014 Marg, and cheque
Rs.15,500/- New no. 363360
and Delhi was a
Cheque no. cancelled
363360 cheque.
dated
25.04.2014
Rs.34,900/-
20. CR no. a) State Bank Axis Bank State cheque not
438/2018, of India, SNE, Ltd. Service Bank of issued by
State Bank Okhla Branch, India, the account
of India v. Industrial New Delhi CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Estate,Delhi Ground
Parliament Floor, B-
Street b) Chque no. Block,
611635 11,
Page 14 of 24
dated Sansad
21.12.2015 Marg,
Rs.1,66,200/- New
Delhi
21. CR no. a) State Bank ICICI Bank, State Cheque not
439/2018, of India, Noida Bank of issued by
State Bank South India, the account
of India v. Extension, CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Part-II, New Ground
Parliament Delhi Floor, B-
Street Block,
b) Cheque no. 11,
566119 Sansad
dated Marg,
05.05.2013 New
Rs.3,00,000/- Delhi
22. CR no. a) State Bank Punjab State Cheque
440/2018, of India, SME National Bank of actually
State Bank Branch, Bank, India, issued for
of India v. Sadar Bazar, Service CCPC, Rs. 1/-.
SHO, PS New Delhi Branch, Ground
Parliament New Delhi Floor, B-
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
927014 11,
dated Sansad
10.01.2014 Marg,
Rs.22,000/- New
Delhi
23. CR no. a) State Bank ICICI Bank State Cheque not
441/2018, of India, Rafi Ltd. Service Bank of issued by
State Bank Ganj Branch, Branch, India, the account
of India v. Aurangabad, New Delhi CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Bihar Ground
Page 15 of 24
Parliament Floor, B-
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
864482 11,
dated Sansad
08.04.2014 Marg,
Rs.62,000/- New
Delhi
24. CR no. a) State Bank Union Bank State Cheque not
442/2018, of India, Moti of India, Bank of issued by
State Bank Nagar, New Service India, the account
of India v. Delhi Branch Branch, CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS New Delhi Ground
Parliament b) Cheque no. Floor, B-
Street 143559 Block,
dated 11,
31.08.2015 Sansad
Rs.1,24,110/- Marg,
New
Delhi
25. CR no. a) State Bank State Bank State No such
443/2018, of India, of Bikaner Bank of cheque
State Bank Tatarpur and Jaipur, India, issued.
of India v. Branch, Service CCPC, Cheque
SHO, PS Bhagalpur, Branch, Ground actually
Parliament Bihar New Delhi Floor, B- issued for
Street Block, Rs.100/- in
b) Cheque no. 11, favour of
657037 Sansad Uninor.
dated Marg,
22.12.2013 New
Rs.22,000/- Delhi
26. CR no. a) State Bank Standard State Cheque not
444/2018, of India, Chartered Bank of issued by
Page 16 of 24
State Bank Allahabad Bank, India, the account
of India v. University Service CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Branch Branch, Ground
Parliament New Delhi Floor, B-
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
339636 11,
dated Sansad
01.11.2012 Marg,
Rs.3,36,337/- New
Delhi
27. CR no. a) State Bank Canara State Cheque no.
445/2018, of India, Bank, Bank of 288491 not
State Bank Bank Road, Service India, issued and
of India v. Gorakhpur Branch, CCPC, was in
SHO, PS Branch New Delhi Ground custody of
Parliament Floor, B- account
Street b) Cheque no. Block, holder.
288491 11, Cheque no.
dated Sansad 288477 for
28.03.2015 Marg, Rs.1500/-
Rs.1,88,200/- New was issued
and Delhi in favour of
Cheque no. one Ram
288477 Dev Shukla.
dated
16.04.2015
Rs.2,05,000/-
28. CR no. a) State Bank Axis Bank State Cheque not
446/2018, of India, Ltd., Bank of issued by
State Bank Konch Service India, the account
of India v. Branch, Gaya, Branch, CCPC, holder.
SHO, PS Bihar New Delhi Ground
Parliament Floor, B-
Page 17 of 24
Street b) Cheque no. Block,
767615 11,
dated Sansad
05.01.2015 Marg,
Rs.2,14,000/- New
Delhi
5. The trial court vide impugned orders dated 11.05.2018 and 30.06.2018 held that the said court did not have jurisdiction over the matter. It was directed that the complaint u/s 200 Cr.P.C. along with the application u/s 156 (3) Cr.P.C. be returned to the complainant to be filed before the court having jurisdiction over the matters.
6. The impugned orders have been challenged on the ground that the trial court has committed error by holding that it has no territorial jurisdiction. It has been submitted that as per provisions of section 178(d), 179 and 181 (4) of Cr.P.C., the Ld. Trial Court was having jurisdiction since the images of the cheques/draft presented in the aforesaid cases were sent to CCPC, which has cleared the said demand draft/cheques. It was in fact the CCPC which was dishonestly induced to deliver the property i.e. money which was debited from the account of the victim account holder and credited to the account of the accused, some of whom are known and some are unknown.
Page 18 of 247. Mr. Ronak Arora and Mr. Karn Kumar Ld. Counsels for the petitioner bank have argued that when the cheque/draft issued by any branch of their bank is presented in any bank, it's electronic image is transmitted to State Bank of India, CCPC, Ground Floor, B-Block, 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi and the cheque /draft is cleared at CCPC for payment. Thus, the actual inducement for payment through the forged cheque/draft is made at State Bank of India, CCPC, Ground Floor, B-Block, 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, which falls within the jurisdiction of PS Parliament street. They have also argued that the effect of forgery of the cheque ensued within the jurisdiction of PS Parliament Street. It is further argued that since the deception was practiced by means of electronic message/images, it can be inquired into or tried by any court, within whose jurisdiction such messages were received. Ld. Counsels have also argued that there might be complicity in the offence of some bank officials at State Bank of India, Cheque Clearing and Processing Centre, Ground Floor, B-Block, 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, which is also to be looked into during investigation. They have relied upon Lee Kun Hee, President Samsung Corporation, South Korea and Others v/s State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2012) 3 Supreme Court Cases 132.
8. Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Ld. APP, on behalf of Respondent No. 1 in CR No.s 382/2018, 383/2018 and 384/2018 and for Respondent in remaining revision petitions has argued Page 19 of 24 that the appropriate jurisdiction in the cases would be of the police stations of the area where the forged cheques/draft were presented. He has, thus, submitted that the Ld. Trial Court has rightly directed the return of complaints.
9. I have heard Sh. Ronak Arora and Sh. Karn Kumar Ld. Counsels for the petitioners and Sh. Ravinder Kumar, Ld. APP for the State/SHO and have also perused the record. Notice to other respondents in CRs no.382/2018, 383/2018 and 384/2018 was not considered necessary.
10. Chapter XIII of the CrPC deals with jurisdiction of the criminal Courts in Inquiries and trials. It is pertinent to refer to sections 179 which stipulates, "179. Offence triable where act is done or consequence ensues. When an act is an offence by reason of anything which has been done and of a consequence which has ensued, the offence may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such consequence has ensued."
11. It can be seen that as per section 179 Cr.P.C., if an act is an offence by reason of (i) anything which has been done, and (ii) of a consequence which has ensued, the offence may be inquired into or tried by a court within whose jurisdiction (i) Page 20 of 24 such thing has been done, or (ii) such consequence has ensued.
12. In Lee Kun Hee, President Samsung Corporation, South Korea and Others v/s State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2012) 3 Supreme Court Cases 132, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held, "28. ............... The place where the agreement was executed, as well as, the places where different constituents of the agreement were carried out, are material factors to determine the relevant court(s) which would/could have jurisdiction in the matter. The place where the consequence of the criminal action (alleged in the complaint) ensues, may also be relevant for the said purpose. And finally, place(s) of receipt and dispatch of communications exchanged by the rival parties, revealing deception as an ingredient of cheating alleged by the complainant, can also be relevant to identify the court(s) having jurisdiction in the matter. The aforesaid relevance becomes apparent from Sections 179, 181 and 182 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which we shall presently examine.
...........
35. Besides the aforesaid, under Section 179 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, even the place(s) wherein the consequence (of the criminal act) "ensues", would be relevant to determine the court of competent jurisdiction. Therefore, even the courts within whose local jurisdiction, the repercussion/effect of the criminal Page 21 of 24 act occurs, would have jurisdiction in the matter. .............
42. Section 179 of the Code of Criminal Procedure vests jurisdiction for inquiry and trial in a Court, within whose jurisdiction anything has been done with reference to an alleged crime, and also, where the consequence of the criminal action ensues. Section 181(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure leaves no room for any doubt, that culpability is relatable even to the place at which consideration is required to be returned or accounted for. Finally, Section 182 of the Code of Criminal Procedure postulates that for offences of which cheating is a component, if the alleged act of deception is shown to have been committed, through communications/letters/ messages, the court within whose jurisdiction the said communications/letters/ messages were sent (or were received), would be competent to inquire into and try the same. Thus viewed, it is not justified for the appellants to contend, that the allegations levelled by the complainant against the accused, specially in respect of the five appellants herein, are not relatable to territorial jurisdiction in India, under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure."
13. In the present cases, the forged cheques/draft had been presented at the banks, which are outside the jurisdiction of PS Parliament Street. However, the inducement on account of such forged cheques/draft took place at State Bank of India, CCPC, Ground Floor, B-Block, 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, Page 22 of 24 where such cheques/draft were passed/cleared. Resultantly the money was transferred from the account of the victim account holder to that of the fraudster. In other words, effect of such forged cheques/draft i.e. the passing of such cheques/draft, which resulted in transfer of money from the account of the victim account holder to the account of the accused, who had presented the forged cheque/draft had taken place at State Bank of India, CCPC, Ground Floor, B-Block, 11, Sansad Marg, New Delhi, which falls within the jurisdiction of PS Parliament street. Therefore, it can not be said that the Ld. Trial Court did not have jurisdiction over the matter. Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Ramesh Awasthi vs. State of NCT of Delhi, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 7832, on which Ld. Trial Court has relied, is not applicable in the facts of these cases.
14. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned orders of the Ld. Trial Court do not appear to be correct. Therefore, the revision petitions are allowed and the impugned orders dated 30.06.2018 and 11-05-2018 are set aside. The Ld. Trial Court is directed to decide the complaints u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and the applications u/s 156(3) Cr.P.C. on merits.
15. The petitioners/revisionists are directed to appear before the Ld. Trial Court on 06-06-2019.
16. This order be kept in CR No. 382/2018, titled State Page 23 of 24 Bank of India v/s The State and Others. Copies of the order be kept in the remaining revision petitions.
17. Trial Court Records be sent back along with copies of this order.
18. Revision files be consigned to the record rooms.
Announced in the open court (Rakesh Syal) Today i.e. 31.05.2019 ASJ-03/NDD/PHC/New Delhi 31.05.2019 Page 24 of 24