Chief Judicial Magistrate Has Jurisdiction Over Entire District, Can Take Cognizance Under NI Act: J&K High Court

In dismissing a plea assailing the issuance of process by a CJM in a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act Justice Sanjay Dhar observed,

“It has been contended that as per Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it is only the Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction the cheque is delivered for collection or where the cheque is presented for payment by the payee which has the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. Therefore, it is the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Magam, which has the jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint and not the CJM, Budgam. The argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner is absolutely frivolous”

While debunking this contention of the petitioner Justice Dhar reasoned,

“.. a Chief Judicial Magistrate of a District is vested with territorial jurisdiction in respect of whole of the District. Therefore, the learned CJM, Budgam was well within his jurisdiction to entertain the impugned complaint and take cognizance of the offences”

These observations case arose from a petition filed by Aijaz Hussain Rather, who challenged the complaint filed against him by Jeelani Ahmad Dar under Section 138 of the NI Act. The complaint, pending before the CJM, Budgam, was related to the dishonor of two cheques amounting to Rs. 46,35,000. The petitioner also challenged the CJM's order dated 12.04.2022, which had issued a process against him.

The petitioner, through his counsel, argued that the CJM, Budgam lacked jurisdiction to entertain the complaint since the complainant's bank was located outside its territorial jurisdiction. Relying on Section 142 of the NI Act, it was contended that only the magistrate within whose jurisdiction the cheque was presented for payment or delivered for collection could entertain the case. According to the petitioner, it was the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Magam, and not the CJM, Budgam, who had jurisdiction.

Dismissing the petitioner's jurisdictional challenge, Justice Dhar held that the argument was "absolutely frivolous." and emphasized that a Chief Judicial Magistrate possesses territorial jurisdiction over the entire district, including all subordinate locations.

Addressing the second ground of challenge that the CJM's order was cryptic and lacked details the Court observed that the order was legally valid. Justice Dhar noted that the CJM, Budgam, after examining the complaint, the complainant's preliminary statement, and the supporting documents, had formed a reasoned opinion that an offense under Section 138 of the NI Act was made out against the petitioner.

The Court further held that while a magistrate's order taking cognizance must demonstrate an application of mind, it is not necessary for the magistrate to reproduce all allegations in detail.

“.. If such an order reflects the application of mind on the part of the Magistrate to the material before him and it bears reference to such material, the said order would be legally perfect and cannot be interfered with”, the court remarked.

Finding no merit in the petition, the High Court dismissed it and vacated any interim relief granted earlier.

Case Title: Aijaz Hussain Rather Vs Jeelani Ahmad Dar

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 27

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment