POTHIYAPPAN Vs. K. SELVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 994 of 2008 on the file of learned Judicial Magistrate, Pattukkottai. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent.

(2.) In the present case, the respondent has once caused presentation of cheque and upon its return, issued statutory notice under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Thereafter, he again has caused representation and issued further notice on 13.05.2008. In preferring the complaint, he has informed the second notice to be merely a reminder and not statutory notice of demand under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and moved an application for condonation of delay of 91 days in preferring the complaint, such period being calculated from the date on which his right to prefer a complaint accrued under the original notice of demand.

(3.) It is not in dispute that the notice caused on 13.05.2008 after subsequent representation of the cheque made a demand for payment and the same has been served on the petitioner/accused. Merely because the respondent has contended that subsequent statutory demand notice dated 13.05.2008 was only a reminder and has fallen back on the original statutory notice of demand, it cannot be stated that his right under the subsequent demand notice on 13.05.2008 would be lost.