LexM/S. HARMAN ELECTRONICS (P) LTD. & ANR. versus M/S. NATIONAL PANASONIC INDIA LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2008) 17 S.C.R. 487 ., MlS. HARMAN ELECTRONICS (P) LTD. & ANR. A v. \ M/S. NATIONAL PANASONIC INDIA LTD. (Crimi_nal Appeal No.2021 of 2008) DECEMBER 12, 2008 B [S.B. SINHA AND CYRIAC JOSEPH, JJ.] --.... ....... Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.177 - Territorial jurisdiction of criminal court - To try case u/s. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act - Held: In order to determine c territorial jurisdiction of criminal Court place of commission of offence is material - Court derives jurisdiction when the cause of action arises - In a case u/s. 138 of the Act, cause of action for filing complaint arises only after completion of the offence, i.e., after service of notice by the holder of the D instrument and failure to pay on the part of accused within 15 days thereafter - Complaint can be filed at the place where ~ cause of action arose - On facts, complaint filed at Delhi not .. maintainable - Direction to transfer the complaint to _ _ competent court at Chandigarh - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - s. 138. E Doctrines/Principles: Principle that 'debtor must seek the creditor' - Applicability of - In criminal case - Held: Not applicable. Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction of criminal Court - Determination of - Basis F t for - Held: Jurisdiction of Criminal Court is governed by the • provisions of Cr.P.C. and not on common law principle . Words and Phrases: 'Communication' - Meaning of. G The question for consideration in the instant appeal .. was as to what is the jurisdiction of a Court to try an - offence u/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. • Allowing the appeal, the Court .. 487 H 488 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 17 S.C.R. A HELD: 1.1. Section 177 Cr.P.C. determines the jurisdiction of a court trying 1the matter. The court ordinarily will have the jurisdiction only where the offence has been committed. Therefore, the place where an offence has been committed plays an important role. 8 [Paras 19 and 20] [501-D-E] 1 1.2. A Court derives a jurisdiction only when the cause of action arises within its jurisdiction. The same cannot be conferred by any act of omission or commission on the part of the! accused. A distinction C must also be borne in mind between the ingredient of an offence and commission of a part of the offence. [Para 24] [503-D] 2.1. The offence under Sectibn 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 can be completed only with the concatenation of a number of acts, namely, (1) Drawing D of the cheque, (2) Presentation of the cheque to the bank, _ (3) Returning the cheque unpaid I by the 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 E of the notice. If five different ;icts were done in five different localities, any one of the courts exercising jurisdiction in one of the five local areas can become the place of trial for the offence u/s. 138 of the Act and the complainant would be at liberty t<l> file a complaint petition F at any of those places. [Para 9] [495-F-H; 496-A] 2.2. It is one thing to say that sending of a notice is one of the ingredients for maintaining the complaint but it is another thing to say that di~honour of a cheque by itself constitutes an offence. For the purpose of proving G its case that the accused had committed an offence u/s. 138 of the Act, the ingredients thereof are required to be proved. What would constitute an offence is stated in the main provision. The proviso apPiended thereto, however, _ imposes certain further conditions which are required to be fulfilled before cognizance of the offence can be H e M/S. HARMAN ELECTRONICS (P) LTD. & ANR. v. MIS. 489 NATIONAL PANASONIC INDIA LTD. taken. If the ingredients for constitution of the offence laid A down in the provisos (a), (b) and (c) appended to Section _.._,. 138, intended to be applied in favour of the accused, there cannot be any doubt that receipt of a notice would ultimately give rise to the cause of action for filing a complaint. As it is only on receipt of the notice the 8 accused at his own peril may refuse to pay the amount. Clauses (b) and (c) of the proviso to Section 138 ~ therefore, must be read together. Issuance of notice would not by itself give rise to a cause of action but communication of the notice would. [Para 14] [499-C-F] c 2.3. While issuance of a noti
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.