DICKSON PREM RAJ Vs. R MANOHARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused in C. C. No. 298 of 1990, on the file of the Judicial. Magistrate No. I, Kuzhithurai, has led this petition under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, praying to call for the records in the aforesaid case and quash the same. THE respondent has filed a private complaint against the petitioner for an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter I shall refer to it as "the Act"). THE allegations in it are briefly as follows: Towards discharge of a debt due to the complainant from the accused, the accused gave a cheque dated April 10, 1990, to the complainant for Rs. 14, 500. THE complainant presented the cheque for encashment in the bank on September 24, 1990. It was returned with the endorsement "refer to drawer". THEreafter, the complainant issued a notice dated September 26, 1990, through his lawyer demanding the accused to pay the amount due under the said cheque. THE accused had received the notice on September 27, 1990. THE accused neither made any payment nor sent any reply. THE accused has committed an offence punishable under section 138 of the Act. Hence, the complaint. Neelambika, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that 1. It is not stated in the complaint as to what kind of debt for which the cheque was issued

(2.) IN the statutory notice sent by the complainant he had demanded payment within ten clear days and no 15 days time was given. Regarding the first submission, the relevant allegations are in para 1 of the complaint. It reads as follows :