Crl. Misc. No. M-34376 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Misc. No. M-34376 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 7.12.2010 Sandeep Dhingra and another ...Petitioners Versus M/s R.K. Textile Industries ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Sumeet Goel, Advocate for the petitioners. Rajan Gupta, J. (oral) The petitioners have preferred the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the complaint as well as summoning order pursuant thereto, under Section 138 read with Section 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 due to dishonour of a cheque for Rs.1,92,975/-(No.055141 dated 22.3.2008). After recording preliminary evidence, the petitioners were summoned to face trial vide order dated 29th August, 2008, Annexure P-2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has assailed the summoning order on the ground that the Magistrate did not have territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and summoning order has been passed in a mechanical manner. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and given careful thought to the facts of the case. I am not impressed by the submissions made by the learned Crl. Misc. No. M-34376 of 2010 2 counsel for the petitioners. He has not been able to show any legal infirmity with the impugned order. A perusal of the summoning order shows that the trial court issued process after examining the complaint, affidavits in support and cheque which was dishonoured. The order was passed on 29th August, 2008. The same has been challenged more than two years thereafter. I, thus, do not find it a fit case for interference in inherent jurisdiction of this court. Learned counsel has not been able to show how the court at Faridabad is not competent to entertain the complaint. The petition is, thus, devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE 7.12.2010 'rajpal'