HIMANGSHU SEKHAR TAH Vs. BISWANATH BHATTACHARJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revisional application dated 29.6.07 under section 401 read with section 482 of Cr. PC challenges the order dated 1.2.07 passed by the Id. Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Burdwan in CR. Case No. 136 of 2003 under section 138 of NI Act whereby and where under the Id. Magistrate rejected the petitioner's petition praying for an order of dropping of the proceeding on the ground that the petition of complaint was not maintainable.

(2.) TWO points were canvassed before the Id. Magistrate and one of them was in relation to law of limitation. That point was also decided against the petioner. In this revisional application the said point has not been taken up.

(3.) MR. Manjit Singh, Id. Counsel for the O.P. No. 1 disputes the submission and argues that it is not the case that two cheques were covered by two separate notices. Both cheques were presented on a single date i.e. 20.1.03 and both cheques having been stood dishonoured by the bank one common notice was issued to the petitioner covering both the cheques and in such circumstances, it cannot be said that the two cheques related to different transaction.