Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a complaint filed by the appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, alleging that a cheque issued by the respondent for repayment of a legally recoverable debt had bounced. The complaint was initially accepted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, but the respondent challenged it in the High Court, claiming that the demand notice had not been served. The High Court quashed the complaint, stating that there was no proof of service of notice, which led to the present appeal. The appellant contended that the High Court erred in its decision, arguing that it is not necessary to state in the complaint that notice was served, as established in the precedent set by C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed. The Supreme Court agreed with the appellant, emphasizing that the issue of service of notice is a matter of evidence and should not have been a basis for quashing the complaint. The Court clarified that under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, service is deemed to have been effected when sent to the correct address by registered post, and it is unnecessary to aver that the accused evaded service. The Court restored the complaint and set aside the High Court's judgment, allowing the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Quashing of Complaint - Grounds for Quashing - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 482 - High Court quashed the complaint on the basis of absence of averment regarding service of notice. The Supreme Court held that it is not necessary to aver in the complaint that notice was served upon the accused, and the matter of service is one of evidence. Therefore, the High Court erred in quashing the complaint (Paras 11-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in quashing the complaint on the ground that the complaint was silent about the service of notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, holding that it is not necessary to aver in the complaint that notice was served upon the accused.
Law Points
- Service of notice
- presumption of service
- quashing of complaint
- Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- 1973
- Evidence Act
- General Clauses Act
