ROUNAQUSINGH GURUDAYALSINGH KANDEY Vs. NITIN ANAND KSHIRSAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.</Jpara> <Jpara>[2] RULE. RULE made returnable forthwith and by consent of learned counsel for all parties, the matter is heard finally.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in H.V. Jayaram Vs. Industrial Credit & Investment Corpn. Of Indian Ltd.,2000 7 SCC 650. THE said case related to offence punishable under section 113(2) of the Companies Act, 1956. In the said case the Hon'ble Supreme Court taking note of Sections 113 and Section 207 of the Companies Act held interalia that the cause of action for default of not sending the share certificates within the stipulated time would arise at the place where the registered office of the company is situated as from that place the share certificates can be posted and are usually posted. However, it is noticed that the point in issue in the present case that is registration of F.I.R. at a Police Station, and investigation by police in a case where they had no jurisdiction was not the point which arose for consideration in the said case, hence, this decision is not of any help to the petitioners.

(4.) In a recent decision of the Supreme Court in Rasiklal Dalpatram Thakkar Vs. State of Gujarat and others, 2010 1 SCC 1 which in fact pertains to investigation of offences in a case, the Supreme Court observed that in view of the provisions of Section 156(1) Cr.P.C. a police officer was competent to investigate any cognizable offence and was also competent to forward the same to the police station having territorial jurisdiction if he came to the conclusion that the crime had been committed beyond his territorial jurisdiction.