ANIL Vs. GANESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only issue involved in this appeal is about service of notice on the respondent-accused. This is a notice required to be sent as per clause (b) to the proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ('N.I. Act' for short). The complainant has sent the notice by Registered Post Acknowledgment Due on proper address, but the postal authority returned the envelope with the remark that it is not claimed by the addressee.

(2.) The learned Magistrate has refused to consider such mode of service as a valid service. In addition to that, when the complainant produced the envelope containing the notice, it was in an opened condition. The learned Magistrate for that purpose has pointed out the lacuna in the case of the complainant in not examining the postman. Whereas, the learned Magistrate has given findings on other issues in favour of the complainant. The learned Magistrate was pleased to acquit the respondent-accused for the above reasons. The said judgment was delivered by the Special Court for the N.I. Act at Nagpur on 21/02/2006 in Criminal Case No.1220/2005. The correctness of the said judgment is challenged by the appellant-complainant.

(3.) The respondent-accused was duly served and he put in appearance also. Even, there was an occasion to saddle costs of Rs.1,000/- on him as well as to appellant vide order dated 04/04/2018. There was also an occasion to issue bailable warrant against the respondent on 12/04/2018. It was also served. However, the respondent has chosen to remain absent. Accordingly, this Court has decided to hear only appellant vide order dated 13/09/2019.