- (1.) Heard. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner praying that the order dated 30th June, 2009 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sambher Lake, District Jaipur along with the order dated 6th August, 2013 passed by the revisional court below whereby order dated 30th June, 2009 was affirmed, be set aside.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner has made following submissions to fortify the prayer made in this petition:-- "(a) That even though the cheque was presented at Sambher Lake, the Court at Sambher lake has no territorial jurisdiction to try the complaint as petitioner being a resident of Maharashtra issued the cheque from her account at Maharashtra."
(3.) The controversy raised is no longer res integra. Hon'ble Apex Court in Nishant Agarwal v. Kailash Kumar Sharma, 2013 10 SCC 72 has upheld the ratio of law laid in K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vidhyan Balan & Ors., 1999 7 SCC 510. Their Lordships have formulated the following question:-- "2. The question which has to be decided in this appeal is whether the Court, where a cheque is deposited for collection, would have territorial jurisdiction to try the accused for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short "the N.I. Act") or would it be only the Court exercising territorial jurisdiction over the drawee bank or the bank on which the cheque is drawn?";