A AMINA Vs. T BABY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against acquittal of the first respondent in a prosecution launched for the offence punishable under S.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court below found all the points in favour of the complainant, but came to the conclusion that the statutory notice was defective as it was despatched beyond 15 days of intimation about the bouncing of the cheques, Exts.P2 and P3 dated 19.8.1996 and 3.1.1997 for Rs. 44,500/- and 25,000/- respectively.

(2.) The cheques were presented in the bank and the bouncing of the cheques was informed to the complainant/appellant as per Ext. P4 dated 25.1.1997. Ext. P8 is the notice. Though, it is dated 11.2.1997, it was really posted only on 13.2.1997. If the days are reckoned from the date of Ext. P4, namely, 25.1.1997, it is beyond 15 days. Statutory notice ought to have been issued within 15 days of intimation about the bouncing. So the Court below concluded that the notice was beyond the time provided for.

(3.) It is contended by the appellant that even in para 4 of the complaint it has been clearly mentioned that dishonour was intimated on 3.2.1997. The same fact was mentioned in the notice as well. Ext. P4 also discloses that the bank had sent it by registered post on 25.1.1997. In such circumstances, it was not possible to receive the memo on the same date itself. Necessarily, reckoning from 3.2.1997 the date of receipt of information, the notice despatched on 13.2.1997 is within the time, it is contended.