1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PERIYA KARUPPIAH Criminal Original Petition(MD)No.663 of 2011 J.Sengolan ... Petitioner/Accused Vs. Kumaresan ... Respondent/ Compla Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. to call for the records in C.C.No.240 of 2007 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate VI, Trichy and transfer the above case to the file of the Judicial Magistrate Krishnagiri, Dharmapuri District. For Petitioner :: Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar For Respondent :: Mr.C.Vakeeswaran O R D E R This Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the transfer of the case pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate NO.6, Trichy in C.C.No.240 of 2007 to the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri for disposal in accordance with law. 2. Heard Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.C.Vakeeswaran, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit in his argument that the complaint has been filed by the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, wrongly before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy, despite the transaction of the alleged issuance of cheques and the drawer bank located in Hosur are not within the jurisdiction of the said Court. He would further submit in his argument that the respondent as complainant had shown that the cause of action has emerged in Trichy, where he has deposited the alleged cheque for collection with his bank and the complainant is also living at that place, within the jurisdiction of that Court. 4.He would further submit in his argument that the said jurisdiction would not sustain as there was a criminal complaint given by the petitioner against the respondent before the Krishnagiri Town Police Station for an offence under Section 386, 471, 406 and 506(ii) of the Indian Penal Code in crime No.1827 of 2008 and the same is pending investigation and the said case has to be taken up along with the present case since the decisions in both the cases are to be reached simultaneously. 5.He would further submit in his argument that the alleged cheques were obtained by the partners of the firm, the respondent/complainant is one of such persons by using coercion against the petitioner at Krishnagiri. The said fact has also been referred to in a suit filed by the wife of the petitioner before the learned District Munsif, Krishnagiri in O.S.No.80 of 2008, for bare https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 injunction and for other reliefs. Therefore, he would request the Court that the said complaint as well as this case pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy are inter connected and jurisdiction is also vested with the jurisdiction of the Court at Krishnagiri and the case pending before the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy has necessarily to be transferred to the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri. Therefore, he would request this Court to pass an order of transfer as sought for. 6.The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit in his argument that the complainant is no doubt living at Trichy and he has presented the cheque issued by the petitioner for the hand loan obtained by him and the cheque was resented in his bank at Trichy and the same was dishonoured for want of funds and returned at Trichy and therefore the cause of action arose at Trichy and the respondent has got every right to launch prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act in the Courts situated in Trichy Town. 7.He would further submit in his argument that the said cheques issued by the petitioner for a hand loan obtained by him and he also issued post dated cheque and handed over the same to the respondent. He would further submit that the respondent has applied for anticipatory bail in the said crime number, but it was dismissed for the fact that the said complaint in crime No.1827 of 2008 on the file of the Krishnagiri Town Police Station and was dropped as to 'Mistake of Fact' and therefore, the alleged complaint said to have been given by the petitioner against the respondent is not sustainable since the facts mentioned therein are not true. Therefore, he would request that there is no necessity for the transfer of the case from the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy to the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri. 8.I have paid anxious consideration to the arguments advanced on either side. 9.The present case in C.C.No.240 of 2007 pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy was taken cognizance by the said Court on a complaint filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act against the petitioner. The cheque issued by the petitioner was said to have been dishonoured when it was presented by the respondent for collection in his bank at Trichy. It is not disputed that the respondent is residing within the jurisdiction of Trichy Courts. Similarly, the cheque, said to have been issued by the petitioner, was handed over to the banker of the respondent within the jurisdiction of Trichy and it has been returned for want of funds and it was made known by the said bank to the respondent, within the jurisdiction of Trichy. Despite the cheque has been issued at Krishnagiri and the petitioner is residing in Krishnagiri, the other transactions comprising the causes of action have also emerged within Trichy Town, and thereby part of cause of action arose in Trichy as well as in Krishnagiri Town. Therefore, it cannot be said that the Trichy Courts especially the Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. However, the other reasons stated by the petitioner that https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 there was a complaint pending before the Krishnagiri Town police station in crime No.1827 of 2008 and it is pending investigation and on filing of the charge sheet, the case will be taken on file and the point to be decided in the said case will have an impact over the present complaint and therefore, the present case shall also be tried along with the said case simultaneously so as to reach a conclusion without contradiction. As far as the said case pending before the Krishnagiri Town Police station in crime No.1827 of 2008 is concerned, it was stated by the respondent that the case was referred as to 'Mistake of Fact' and the order copy produced by the respondent seeking for the anticipatory bail would show that the claim of the respondent for anticipatory bail was dismissed owing to the fact that the case in crime No.1827 of 2008 on the file of Krishnagiri Town Police was referred as 'Mistake of Fact'. 10.Therefore, we could see that the said complaint in crime No.1827 of 2008 on the file of Krishnagiri Town Police Station was found to be false and it was closed, and there is no case pending and there would not be any charge sheet filed and no case would be taken on file for trial except in a circumstance when reinvestigation has been ordered or any private complaint is filed on the same cause of action and taken cognizance by the Court. Therefore, at this point of time, there is no case pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Krishnagiri so as to club this case for simultaneous adjudication. Therefore, it cannot be said that the case pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.6, Trichy has to be transferred to the file of Krisnagiri for disposal. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner cannot be entertained for the aforesaid reasons and the transfer of case cannot be ordered for any reason stated by the petitioner. 11.For the foregoing discussions, I am of the considered view that the request of the petitioner is not sustainable and accordingly, this criminal original petition is dismissed. However, the learned Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy is directed to expedite the trial of the case and to dispose of the same within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accounts) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1. The Judicial Magistrate No.VI, Trichy. 2. -DO-Thro' The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichy +1cc to Mr.Vakeeswaran, Advocate, Sr.No.8617 Crl.O.P.(MD)No.663 of 2011 11.02.2011 arul/SMA/28.2.2011/4C/3P https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/