IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 4TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 13TH KARTHIKA 1930 Tr.P(Crl.).No. 66 of 2008() --------------------------- CC.21/2006 of J.M.F.C.-I MUVATUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- R.GIREESAN SHANTI, AGED 32 YEARS, KAVARA VIDHYA JYOTHISHALAYAM, VENJARAMOODU POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.J.JAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. R.GOPAKUMAR, AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.A.K.RAMAKRISHNAN NAIR, PALACKAL HOUSE, KOOTHATTUKULAM KARA, -DO- VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. GIKKU JACOB THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Tr. P.(Crl.)No. 66 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 4th day of November, 2008 O R D E R The petitioner faces indictment in a prosecution under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Cognizance has been taken. The case stands posted to 3.1.2009 for appearance of the petitioner, submits the counsel. The short contention raised by the petitioner is that there is no relevant averment in the complaint which clothe the J.F.M.C., Muvattupuzha with jurisdictional competence to try the offence under Section 138 of the Act alleged against the petitioner. The only relevant averment that can be discovered in the complaint is that the cheque was presented through the Canara Bank, Koothattukulam, within the jurisdiction of the J.F.M.C., Muvattupuzha. The counsel relies on the decision in Santhoshkumar v. Mohanan (2008 (3) KLT 461) and contends that the mere fact that the cheque was presented for collection through the complainant bank at a different venue will not confer jurisdiction on the court to try the case. Tr. P.(Crl.)No. 66 of 2008 2 2. Notice was issued to the respondent. There is no appearance. I am satisfied that this petition deserves to be allowed. I am not satisfied that the proceedings deserves to be quashed. Direction can be issued to the court having jurisdiction to deal with the matter. 3. In the result: a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed. b) There shall be a direction to the J.F.M.C, Muvattupuzha to transfer the case, C.C. 21 of 2006 to the Court of the C.J.M., Trivandrum. Records shall forthwith be forwarded to the Court of C.J.M., Trivandrum and parties shall be directed to appear before that Court on 1.12.2008. c) The parties shall appear before the J.F.M.C, Trivandrum. on 1.12.2008 to continue the proceedings without waiting for any further direction. The learned C.J.M., Trivandrum shall dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible. D) Communicate the order to both courts. (R. BASANT) Judge tm Tr. P.(Crl.)No. 66 of 2008 3