NARESH BUTANI Vs. ROSLIE TRIPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Advocate, appearing for the petitioner is present. None, however, appears on behalf of the opposite party even on repeated calls.

(2.) The instant application has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of the proceeding and/or setting aside the order dated 17th February, 2003 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore in Complaint Case No. C/4210 whereby the learned Court was pleased to reject the application of the accused No; 2, petitioner herein, who come up before the aforesaid Court with plea that the said case is hit by law of limitation as the case was not instituted within the period of limitation, as envisaged in Section 138 as also 142 of the N.I. Act.

(3.) Hearing the learned Advocate for the petitioner and perusing the impugned order itself, it is quite clear that the notice was served upon the present petitioner on 20.3.1998 and the instant case was filed on 9.12.1998 that is long after the statutory period of 45 days.