M/S SHRI SENDHUR AGRO & OIL INDUSTRIES versus KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

M/S SHRI SENDHUR AGRO & OIL INDUSTRIES versus KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD.

No case was made out to order transfer under Section 406 CrPC. Although the Supreme Court's power to transfer criminal cases under Section 406 remains intact, transfer may be ordered only when expedient for the ends of justice — typically where there is reasonable, evidence-backed apprehension that justice will not be done; mere inconvenience, travel hardship, language difficulty or multiplicity of proceedings are insufficient. Further, jurisdiction under Section 142(2)(a) NI Act is determined by where the cheque is presented for collection through the payee's account (as clarified by the Explanation), and the Chandigarh courts had jurisdiction in the facts of these petitions; hence...

Parties
Petitioner: M/s Shri Sendhur Agro & Oil Industries; Respondent: Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Transfer Petition Under Section 406 Cr.p.c. / Final Disposal (petition Dismissed)
Outcome
Transfer Petition dismissed; connected transfer petitions disposed of
Legal Topics
Section 406 Cr PC, Section 138 NI Act, Section 142 NI Act, Section 142 a NI Act, Territorial Jurisdiction, Transfer of Criminal Cases, Ends of Justice, Cause of Action
Criminal Procedure (cr.p.c.) Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Securitisation and Recovery Proceedings Section 406 Cr PC Section 138 NI Act Section 142 NI Act Section 142 a NI Act Territorial Jurisdiction +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/s Shri Sendhur Agro & Oil Industries

Petitioner

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Transfer Petition Under Section 406 Cr.p.c. / Final Disposal (petition Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a complaint under Section 138 NI Act can be transferred under Section 406 CrPC on ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction of the court in which the complaint is filed
  2. 2 If the court lacks territorial jurisdiction to try an offence under Section 138 NI Act, whether Supreme Court can transfer the complaint under Section 406 CrPC to the court having territorial jurisdiction
  3. 3 Whether the phrase in Section 406 CrPC 'expedient for the ends of justice' embraces lack of territorial jurisdiction to try an offence under Section 138 NI Act

Ratio Decidendi

No case was made out to order transfer under Section 406 CrPC. Although the Supreme Court's power to transfer criminal cases under Section 406 remains intact, transfer may be ordered only when expedient for the ends of justice — typically where there is reasonable, evidence-backed apprehension that justice will not be done; mere inconvenience, travel hardship, language difficulty or multiplicity of proceedings are insufficient. Further, jurisdiction under Section 142(2)(a) NI Act is determined by where the cheque is presented for collection through the payee's account (as clarified by the Explanation), and the Chandigarh courts had jurisdiction in the facts of these petitions; hence...

Court Disposition

Transfer Petition dismissed; connected transfer petitions disposed of

Orders

  • Transfer Petition (Crl.) No. 608 of 2024 dismissed
  • All other connected transfer petitions disposed of in identical terms