committed by respondents at Rewari, as it has come on record that respondents had criminal designs from very outset and they wanted to betray and cheat the petitioner by craving for his money. The criminal and dishonest behaviour of the respondents could be gauged at the very outset. The compromise, which has been entered into between the parties at Rewari was that if the petitioner would pay Rs. 5.50 lakhs to respondent No. 2, the matter would be settled. He further contends that money was also paid at Rewari. Despite having received the said amount, respondents have backed out of the compromise and, therefore, has committed an offence, which was within the jurisdiction of the Court at Rewari. He further submits that provisions as contained in Sections 178/181 (4) Cr.P.C., which deal with territorial jurisdiction, confer right upon the Court in a case even if a part of the offence was committed by the accused in the territorial jurisdiction, where the complainant prefers to proceed against respondents. Counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Asit Bhattacharjee Versus M/s Hanuman Parsad Ojha and others, 2007 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 177.
