Ramesh S/O Raja Ujagare vs Mohammad Sadiq S/O Abdul Samad And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2191 Bom

                                                                                                                                                        31criwp41.22.odt
                                                                                           1


                                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                         NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                     CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 41 OF 2022
         Ramesh Raja Ujagare..Versus...Mohammad Sadiq Abdul Samad and anr
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                                                             Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
                                            None for the petitioner
                                            Mr. A.R.Chutke, APP for respondent No. 2/State



                                                                                        CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATE : 03/03/2022

1] None for the petitioner. Learned APP for Respondent No. 2/State.

2] The petition challenges the order dated 6.12.2019 passed by the learned JMFC, who by relying upon Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod vrs. State of Maharashtra (2014) 9 SCC 129 has returned the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, which was filed at Risod, for presentation to the proper Court at Parbhani on the ground that the cheque in question was drawn on the Union Bank of India, Parbhani. The said order came to be challenged in revision, in which the learned Sessions Court by following the judgment in Bridgestone India Private Limited vrs. Inderpal Singh (2016) 2 SCC 75, wherein after considering Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod (supra) it has been held that the amendment by way of Section 142 (2) of the N.I. Act, had 31criwp41.22.odt

retrospectivity and so also by considering Section 142(2) of the said Act has held that the Court where the cheque in question was presented for realization would have jurisdiction, has allowed the revision and set aside the order of the learned JMFC.

3] In my considered opinion, the position stands covered by Bridgestone India Private Limited (supra), in view of which I do not see any merit in the petition. The same is dismissed.

JUDGE

Rvjalit

Digitally sign byRAJESH VASANTRAO JALIT Location:

Signing Date:03.03.2022 17:37