2005 and they have been pending since then till now. At this point of time after seven years of institution of the criminal cases, this Court cannot decide on the point of territorial jurisdiction which is primarily a mixed question of fact and law. The complaints do not disclose the place where the accounts were finalized and the place where the respective cheques were handed over to the de facto complainant by the accused, irrespective of the bank on which those cheques were drawn by the accused. Therefore, these are fit matters which have to be tried by the lower Court and disposed of on the basis of evidence to be let in by both the parties. In case the lower Court, after trial, finds that the said Court had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaints, then it is open to the lower Court to record the said finding on the basis of evidence on record and return the complaints to the complainant for presentation to proper Court; or otherwise the lower Court may dispose of the cases on merits in case the lower Court finds that it has got territorial jurisdiction on the basis of the evidence to be let in by both the parties as per the law prevailing on the date of disposal.
