Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9. Jurisdiction of the criminal courts in inquiries and trials is governed by Chapter XIII of Cr.PC and according to section 177 Cr.PC, an offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. In the present context section 179 Cr.PC is relevant, which reads as under ­ ''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.'' (emphasis supplied)

(emphasis supplied) ............

...........

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 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.

11. Therefore, in view of the sec. 179 Cr.PC & Lee Kun Hee (supra) not only a court, within whose local jurisdiction the offence is committed, will have the jurisdiction to try that case, but the court in whose jurisdiction consequence of a criminal act is ensued, will also have the jurisdiction.

12. Coming to the facts in the petitions, various manipulated & forged cheques of SBI were presented in different banks at different places outside the jurisdiction of PS Parliament Street, the consequence of which was ensued at SBI, CTS Branch, which falls within the area of jurisdiction of PS Parliament Street. The bad cheques were cleared for payment by SBI, CTS Branch on the basis of images as per rules of banking business, without which the offence of cheating & use of a forged document would not be complete. Ramesh Awasthi (supra) is not relevant to the facts of these cases.