[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 247/2008 VISHNU PRATAP Vs. M/s IRA RESORTS PVT. LTD. & ANR. Date: 15.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Vijay Choudhary for the petitioner. **** The instant criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C is directed against the cognizance order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.10, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Criminal Complaint No. 1864/2006, whereby the Court below took cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order of cognizance on the ground that mechanical order has been passed by the Court below without applying mind. Further a Memorandum of Understanding was executed on 08.10.2005 for purchase of land situated at Village and Kasba Hubli, Devanhali Taluk, Rural District of Banglore on the national highway No.7 and as per the Memorandum of Understanding, the jurisdiction lies with Village Hubli, Rural District of Banglore. [2] It is also contended that a notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was given to the petitioner on 07.04.2006 and the complaint was filed by the respondent No.1 M/s Iran Resorts Pvt. Ltd. before the trial Court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on 11.05.2006. Therefore, the notice is also in violation of the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It is further contended that the cognizance order has been passed in mechanical manner without considering the jurisdiction aspect which is also against the law and facts. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully gone through the impugned cognizance order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No.10, Jaipur City, Jaipur. The objections which are raised by the petitioner here in this misc. petition, the same can be raised by the petitioner at the time of framing charge. At the time of taking cognizance, the Court below has only to see whether prima-facie case is made out against the accused or not, and as the cheque is presented in Jaipur and after serving the notice the complaint has been filed, now jurisdiction point can only be looked into and adjudicated at the time of [3] framing charge and the petitioner is always at liberty to redress his grievance and submit the objections which are raised here in this misc. petition, but in any case, the impugned order of cognizance requires no interference by this Court. Consequently, the misc. petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/ [4] S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. STAY APPLN. NO. 147/2008 IN S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 247/2008 VISHNU PRATAP Vs. M/s IRA RESORTS PVT. LTD. & ANR. Date: 15.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE Mr. Vijay Choudhary for the petitioner. **** As the criminal misc. petition has been dismissed today, the stay application also stands dismissed. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/