9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 996X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 138, Negotiable instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'the Act of 1881') was filed on behalf of the complainant-respondent in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarhbas,. District Alwar on 17.7.98 with the averments that two cheques respectively dated 18.5.98 of Rs. 70,192/- and dt. 22.5.98 of Rs. 66,800/- were issued by the accused-petitioner in favour of the complainant-respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laint should be dismissed. The learned Magistrate dismissed this application vide order dated 23.7.2001. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that it was necessary to make averments in the complaint itself that on what date the notice was received by the accused and the payment was not made within 15 days of the receipt of the notice according to Sub-clause (b) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prima facie appears that the date of receipt of the notice is 17.7.98 and the complaint under Section 138 of the Act, 1881 was also filed on the same day, but, cognizance was taken on ,15.9.98 and thus, this cognizance is not bad in law in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court (supra), wherein it has been held that mere presentation of the complaint in the court cannot be held to mean ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed not disclosing the cause of action in terms of Clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138, the court may not take cognizance till the time the cause of action arises to the complainant. Taking cognizance of an offence by the Court has to be distinguished from the filing of the complaint by the complainant. Thus, in view of the verdict of Hon'ble the Apex Court, though the complaint was premat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
