M/S Bridgestone India Pvt. Ltd. vs Inderpal Singh on 24 November, 2015
5. The Apex court in the case Bridgestone India Private Limited v.
Inderpal Singh reported in (2016) 2 SCC 75 has categorically held in para
13 thereof that a perusal of the amended Sec.142(2), leaves no room for any
doubt, especially in view of the explanation thereunder, that with reference to
an offence under Sec.138 of the N.I.Act, the place where a cheque is delivered
for collection, i.e., the branch of the bank of the payee or holder in due course,
where the drawee maintains an account, would be determinative of the place
of territorial jurisdiction. Further it was held in para 16 of the above said
judgment of the Apex Court that since the dishonoured cheque in question
in that case was presented for encashment at the collection bank of the
complainant at Indore, the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Indore,
would have the territorial jurisdiction to take cognizance of the
proceedings initiated by the complainant therein, after promulgation of
::6::