During search it transpired that a cash amount of Rs. 30 Lakhs had been deposited in account of STC maintained with bank in Ghaziabad and on same date, an amount of Rs. 7.50 lakhs was transferred from that account to bank account of applicant. Proprietor of STC denied ownership of amount.On enquiry by Benami Prohibition Unit, applicant admitted that sum of Rs. 7.50 lakhs deposited into bank account of STC was applicant’s unaccounted cash, which was deposited during demonetization period and had been transferred to his bank account.Thereafter complaint was filed before Speical Court and Additional Session Judge, Lucknow took cognizance of the alleged offence and summoned applicant to face trial.Applicant contended that since applicant resided at New Delhi, i.e. beyond territorial jurisdiction of Court which had passed summoning order, as per statutory provision contained in section 202 Cr.P.C., it was mandatory for Court to have conducted an inquiry before taking cognizance of offence and summoning applicant. Section 202 Cr.P.C. merely directs that Magistrate shall hold an enquiry to inquire into case himself or direct an investigation to be made by a police officer or by such other person as he thinks fit, for purpose of deciding whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding; it does not prescribe the manner of holding an enquiry under this provision. Summoning order passed after taking into consideration averments made in the complaint filed by Union of India through public servant, after perusing documents filed with complaint and after recording satisfaction that there was sufficient ground for proceeding against applicant, fulfilled requirement of holding an enquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C. and therefore, application filed by applicant was to be dismissed. Notification dated October 16, 2018 ((2018) 408 ITR (St) 30)