ASIF AKBANI Vs. P K MANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned xiii Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, chennai has taken cognizance of the case in C. C. No. 9180 of 2003 and issued process. At this stage, the petitioner/accused has preferred the present petition to quash the proceedings. The statutory notice issued to the petitioner has been returned unserved with a postal endorsement. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that such a return should not be construed as deemed service and therefore, the cognizance of the case taken by the learned Magistrate is erroneous and sought to quash the proceedings.

(2.) PER contra the learned counsel for the respondent/complainant submits that statutory notice has been issued and since the petitioner/accused was not available in the address, it was returned with an endorsement

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on a case reported in (1993 (3) Crimes 175) M. Sundaram v. C. M. Ramraj, wherehin it has been laid as follows :