CRL M.C. 2332/2011 Page 1 of 3 $~9 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2332/2011 % Judgment delivered on: 13th October, 2011 IRIS COMPUTERS LTD. ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. A.B. Pandey, Adv. versus APARNA RAJNIKANTH PATEL ..... Respondent Through : None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? No. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? No. SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral) 1. Vide instant petition the petitioner has prayed to set aside the impugned order dated 09.10.2009 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi whereby the complaint case filed by petitioner under Section 138 NI Act ordered to be returned for lack of territorial jurisdiction in view of the order passed in W. P. (C) No.11911/2009 titled CRL M.C. 2332/2011 Page 2 of 3 ‘Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee Vs. Govt. of NCT of Delhi’ dated 23.09.2009. 2. Without adverting to the contentions raised in the instant petition, it is admitted position that cheque in question presented for encashment and legal notice in the instant petition has been issued from Delhi. 3. Vide a judgment delivered by me on 09.09.2011 in Crl. Rev. P. 170/2010, ‘GE Capital Transportation Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Rahisuddin Khan,’ view has been taken on the jurisdiction keeping the case of K. Bhaskaran Vs. S B Balan AIR 1999 SC 3762, whereby 5 ingredients were decided for offences U/s 138 NI Act as under:- “The Offence u/s 138 NI Act can be completed only with the concatenation of a number of acts. Following are the acts which are components of the said offence:- 1. Drawing of the cheque, 2. Presentation of the cheque to the bank, 3. Returning the cheque unpaid by drawee bank, 4. Giving notice in writing to the drawer of the cheque demanding payment of the cheque amount, 5. Failure of the drawer to make payment within 15 days of the receipt of the notice.” CRL M.C. 2332/2011 Page 3 of 3 “----If the five different acts were done in different localities any one of the courts exercising jurisdiction in one of the five local areas can become place of trial for offence u/s 138 NI Act.” 4. Since, I have already taken a view in the aforesaid case, I accordingly allow Crl. M.C. No.2332/2011. Consequently, I set aside the impugned dated 09.10.2009 passed by learned ld. MM and directed to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 5. Petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on 03.11.2011 for directions. SURESH KAIT, J October 13th 2011 Mk