BINANI UDYOG Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition u/s. 428 Cr. P. C. is directed against the order dt. 24. 10. 1998 passed by the learned Judicial magistrate, Sri Vijaynagar Whereby he dismissed the application of the petitioners for dropping proceedings against them.

(2.) MR. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners, contended that the cause of action to file complaint u/s. 142 aries only after a notice is served by the holder of the cheque on its drawer but in this case the petitioner had not been served with a notice. Relying on the cases of tomy Jacob v. Thomas (JT 1997 (3) SC-344) and Chimanlal v. State of rajasthan (1997 (3) RLW (Raj.)-1446), he submitted that the cognizance order be quashed.

(3.) THE learned public prosecutor, on the other hand, pointing out that the notices were sent to the petitioners within 15 days of the receipt of the information from the bank but they avoided the service of the notices, argued that it should be presumed that they had notice of the dishonour of the cheque.