THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.13701 of 2010 ORDER: This Criminal petition is filed by the petitioner approaching this Court to quash the proceedings against her in C.C.No.1913 of 2010 on the file of the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, whereby she is facing trial for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act(for short ‘the Act’). Heard both sides. The short point for consideration before this Court as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner is as follows: According to the petitioner, the cheque was not deposited within a reasonable time as supported under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. As far as this point is concerned, the learned Magistrate also stated that the cheque was signed on 06.10.2009 and presented on 03.04.2010. On perusal of the records, this Court is of the view that the cheque is deposited within the time limit of six months as per the bank regulations concerned. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on Section 73 and also Section 105 of the Act, which runs as follows: “Section 73: Presentment of cheque to charge any other person: A cheque must, in order to charge any person except the drawer, be presented within a reasonable time after delivery by such person. Section 105: Reasonable time: In determining what is a reasonable time for presentment for acceptance or payment, for giving notice of dishonour and for noting, regard shall be had to the nature of the instrument and the usual course of dealing with respect to similar instruments; and, in calculating such time, public holidays shall be excluded.” By relying on the above provisions, the learned counsel submitted that the cheque should be presented within a reasonable time after delivery of such instrument. The last word ‘delivery’ of said cheque means, if the cheque is given in discharge of legally enforceable debt, it should be deposited within a reasonable time. When the banking regulations permit the respondent herein to deposit the cheque within a period of six months, the deposit of the same within six months in no way take over the case of the respondent herein. Learned counsel relied on a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in VEERAYEE AMMAL v. SEENI AMMAL[1], which is delivered on the basis of Specific Relief Act, 1963, whereby the learned counsel wants to inform to this Court, ‘reasonable time’ means it has to be decided on the facts and circumstances of the case. In the present facts and circumstances of the case, a reading of the complaint clearly indicates that after availing the loan, the cheque has to be returned by the complainant to the petitioner herein, who issued the same. The judgment relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the present facts and circumstances of the case. The said judgment is delivered by the apex Court in a different contest, that too, on the basis of the Specific Relief Act. In view of the same, the said two contentions raised by the learned counsel are not merit acceptance. Hence, the criminal petition is dismissed. As far as the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned, the petitioner’s presence before the trial Court is dispensed with except the dates on which the learned Magistrate insists for the same and she shall be represented properly through her counsel. The miscellaneous petitions, if any, filed along with the criminal petition shall stand closed. ________________ RAJA ELANGO, J. 25th February 2011, Rns. [1] (2002) 1 Supreme Court Cases