Madras High Court
Sivasankara Narayanan vs / on 5 February, 2025
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Crl.O.P.No.8327 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
Crl.O.P.No.8327 of 2023
& Crl.M.P.No.5275 of 2023
Sivasankara Narayanan,
Son of Rajamanickam, Aged about 61 years,
No. 36, 2nd Cross Street,
Gubera Nagar,
Vengikkal Village and Post,
Trivannamalai Taluk & District. ... Petitioner/Complainant
/versus/
Selvam,
Son of Rajamanickam, Aged about 49 years,
Paddy Rice Business,
No. 1166/C, Parvathi Rice Mill Compound,
Thendral Nagar,
Vengikkal Village and Post,
Tiruvannamalai Taluk & District ... Respondent/Accused
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,
pleased to call for the records in C.C.No.1/2016, on the file of Judicial
Magistrate, Fast Track Court (ML), Tiruvannamalai and to set aside the same as
an abuse of process and pass such or further other orders.
For Petitioner : Ms.K.Abhirame
For Respondent : Mr.G.Murugesh Kumar.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 7
Crl.O.P.No.8327 of 2023
ORDER
This petition has been filed to call for the records in
C.C.No.1/2016, on the file of Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court (ML),
Tiruvannamalai and to set aside the same as an abuse of process
2. Challenging the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate, FTC
(ML), Tiruvannamalai, in C.C. No. 1 of 2016, and thereby transferring C.C. No.
1 of 2016 to the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry.
3. The petitioner is the complainant and the respondent is the
accused. The petitioner filed a complaint for the offence under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act). After trial, when the matter was
posted for judgment, the trial Court, namely the Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track
Court (ML), Tiruvannamalai, transferred the entire case to the file of the
Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry, on the ground of Section 142-A of the N.I.
Act.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the
complaint was filed in the year 2014, has cognizance was only taken on 2017.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
After the amendment, the Judicial Magistrate, FTC (ML), Tiruvannamalai has
jurisdiction to try the case. Therefore, the amendment is not applicable to
pending cases. It is relevant to extract the provision of Section 142-A of the
N.I. Act.
Section 142-A: Validation for transfer of pending
cases.
(i) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or any judgment, decree,
order or direction of any court, all cases transferred to the
court having jurisdiction under sub-section (2) of section
142, as amended by the Negotiable Instruments
(Amendment) Ordinance, 2015, shall be deemed to have
been transferred under this Act, as if that sub-section had
been in force at all material times.
(ii) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
section (2) of section 142 or sub-section (1), where the
payee or the holder in due course, as the case may be, has
filed a complaint against the drawer of a cheque in the
court having jurisdiction under sub-section (2) of section
142 or the case has been transferred to that court under
sub-section (1) and such complaint is pending in that
court, all subsequent complaints arising out of section 138
against the same drawer shall be filed before the same
court irrespective of whether those cheques were delivered
for collection or presented for payment within the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
territorial jurisdiction of that court.
(iii) If, on the date of the commencement of the
Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2015, more
than one prosecution filed by the same payee or holder in
due course, as the case may be, against the same drawer
of cheques is pending before different courts, upon the
said fact having been brought to the notice of the court,
such court shall transfer the case to the court having
jurisdiction under sub-section (2) of section 142, as
amended by the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment)
Ordinance, 2015, before which the first case was filed and
is pending, as if that sub-section had been in force at all
material times.
The jurisdiction of the trial Court as contemplated under Section
142-A (2) of N.I Act is applicable and the relevant portion is extract below:
Section 142-A (2) of N.I Act.
(1)......
(2). Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
section (2) of section 142 or sub-section (1), where the
payee or the holder in due course, as the case may be, has
filed a complaint against the drawer of a cheque in the
court having jurisdiction under sub-section (2) of section
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
142 or the case has been transferred to that court under
sub-section (1) and such complaint is pending in that
court, all subsequent complaints arising out of section 138
against the same drawer shall be filed before the same
court irrespective of whether those cheques were delivered
for collection or presented for payment within the
territorial jurisdiction of that court.
5. Therefore, the trial Court has rightly transferred the entire case
bundle to the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry.
6. This Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by
the trial Court. The entire bundle has now been transferred to the Judicial
Magistrate, Puducherry. It is made clear that the trial court, namely the Judicial
Magistrate, Puducherry, is directed to hear the arguments on both sides without
eschewing the evidence which has already been recorded and to pronounce the
judgment within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
05.02.2025
Neutral citation : Yes/No
Speaking/non-speaking order
To,
1. The Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court (ML), Tiruvannamalai.
2. The Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
bsm
05.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
