DEV VART Vs. BANK OF BARODA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'Cr.P.C.') praying for quashing of the summoning order dtd. 9/5/2019 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-04 (NI Act), Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in CC No.15240/2018, titled Bank of Baroda v. Dev Vart, as also the abovesaid Criminal Complaint itself.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the present case, pursuant to the return of the cheque issued by the petitioner from the bank, the respondent had issued a demand notice dtd. 25/7/2018 to the petitioner. The said notice, though posted on 25/7/2018, was received by the petitioner on 27/7/2018. She submits that in terms of the Proviso (c) to Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, 'NI Act'), the cause of action for filing of the complaint would arise only after 15 days from the receipt of the notice by the petitioner, that is, on or after 11/8/2018.

(3.) In the present case, however, the respondent filed the subject complaint on 10/8/2018, that is, before of the cause of action for filing the same had arisen. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Yogendra Pratap Singh v. Savitri Pandey, (2014) 10 SCC 713, she submits that in similar circumstances, the Supreme Court has held that a complaint filed before the expiry of 15 days of service of notice cannot be treated as a complaint in the eyes of law and criminal proceedings initiated on such complaint are liable to be quashed.