M/s. Shakti Travel & Tours Vs. State of Bihar & Anr.
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 412 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 2576 of 1999)
(Arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 2576 of 1999)
Petitioner: M/s. Shakti Travel & Tours
Respondent: State of Bihar & Anr.
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 412 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 2576 of 1999)
(Arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 2576 of 1999)
Judges: G.B. PATTANAIK & U.C. BANERJEE, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Apr 28, 2000
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAW
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Section 138 – Complaint – Maintainability – No mention of notice having been served. Held : Complaint quashed.
(Para 2)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Accused who is the Appellant, assails the order of the High Court refusing to quash the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The only ground on which the learned Counsel for the Appellant prays for quashing of the com-plaint is that on the assertions made in paragraph 8 of the complaint, it must be held that notice has not been served and, therefore, an application under Section 138 could not have been maintained. Undoubtedly, the accused has a right to pay the money within 15 days from the date of the service of notice and only when it fails to pay, it is open for the complainant to file a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. That being the position and in the complaint itself having not been mentioned that the notice has been served, on the assertions made in paragraph 8, the complaint itself is not maintainable. We accordingly quash the complaint.
3. The appeal is accordingly allowed.
1. Leave granted.
2. Accused who is the Appellant, assails the order of the High Court refusing to quash the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The only ground on which the learned Counsel for the Appellant prays for quashing of the com-plaint is that on the assertions made in paragraph 8 of the complaint, it must be held that notice has not been served and, therefore, an application under Section 138 could not have been maintained. Undoubtedly, the accused has a right to pay the money within 15 days from the date of the service of notice and only when it fails to pay, it is open for the complainant to file a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. That being the position and in the complaint itself having not been mentioned that the notice has been served, on the assertions made in paragraph 8, the complaint itself is not maintainable. We accordingly quash the complaint.
3. The appeal is accordingly allowed.
