Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kaushik Chatterjee, was appointed as Group Chief Risk Officer-Executive Director of a non-banking finance company (the second respondent) on 4 August 2016, joining its Delhi office. He was transferred to Mumbai on 10 April 2017 and resigned in July 2018. During his tenure, three loans were sanctioned by the company to different borrowers: Zillion Infraprojects Private Ltd. (loan sanctioned 26 October 2016, Rs. 4,30,00,000), Al-Fatah Tours and Travels (loan sanctioned 22 September 2019, Rs. 71,50,000), and Hotel M.S. (loans sanctioned 30 December 2016 and 28 December 2017, Rs. 46,00,000 and Rs. 5,13,594). The company lodged three complaints with the Gurugram police, resulting in FIRs No. 452/2018, 748/2017, and 356/2019, alleging offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including cheating, criminal breach of trust, and conspiracy. After investigation, chargesheets were filed in all three cases. The petitioner filed transfer petitions under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking transfer of these cases from Gurugram to Delhi, primarily on two grounds: lack of territorial jurisdiction and apprehension of bias due to the de facto complainant's alleged influence in Gurugram. The petitioner argued that the loan agreements were executed in Delhi, Indore, and Surat, and that no part of the cause of action arose in Gurugram. He also alleged that the de facto complainant falsely claimed to have an office in Gurugram. The respondents contended that the question of territorial jurisdiction is a factual issue to be determined at trial, and that the property offered as security for one loan was located in Gurugram. The petitioner later abandoned the ground of apprehension of bias. The Supreme Court, after hearing arguments, dismissed the transfer petitions, holding that the issue of territorial jurisdiction is a mixed question of law and fact that cannot be decided in transfer proceedings. The Court noted that the petitioner could raise the jurisdictional objection before the trial court, which is competent to decide it. The Court also observed that the power to transfer cases under Section 406 CrPC is discretionary and should not be exercised when the jurisdictional issue is debatable and requires evidence.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Transfer of Cases - Section 406, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The petitioner sought transfer of three criminal cases from Gurugram to Delhi on the ground that no part of cause of action arose in Gurugram. The Court held that the question of territorial jurisdiction is a mixed question of law and fact to be determined at trial, not in transfer proceedings, and dismissed the petitions. (Paras 1-24) B) Criminal Procedure - Territorial Jurisdiction - Distinction between Civil and Criminal - Sections 177-184, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The Court explained that unlike civil cases, criminal jurisdiction is determined by place of commission, consequence, or presence of accused/victim/property, and objections can be raised at any stage without a bar akin to Section 21 CPC. (Paras 18-21) C) Criminal Procedure - Transfer Petition - Grounds - Section 406, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The petitioner abandoned the ground of apprehension of bias. The Court held that transfer on ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction is not warranted when the issue is debatable and requires evidence. (Paras 9-10, 22-24)
Issue of Consideration
Whether criminal cases pending in Gurugram should be transferred to Delhi on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction and apprehension of bias.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the transfer petitions, holding that the question of territorial jurisdiction is a mixed question of law and fact that cannot be decided in transfer proceedings. The petitioner may raise the jurisdictional objection before the trial court.
Law Points
- Territorial jurisdiction in criminal cases
- Transfer of criminal cases
- Cause of action in criminal proceedings
- Section 177 CrPC
- Section 406 CrPC
