IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRAPRADESH AT HYDERABAD HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2563 of 2010 DATE: 30.12.2011 Between: M.Sudhakar …… Petitioner And Noorbasha Nagoor Saheb and another ...Respondents HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU CRIMINAL PETITION No.2563 of 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is accused of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (in short, the Act). The only point urged by the petitioner’s counsel in this case is with regard to service of statutory notice under Section 138 proviso (b) of the Act. It is contended that the said notice is not in accordance with law. The cheque was dishonoured in this case for want of sufficient funds. The complainant/1st respondent got issued the statutory notice dated 12.12.2006 demanding him to pay the cheque amount within 15 days. The said notice was returned for want of door number. The complainant again sent the same notice to the accused with door number on 19.12.2006. The said notice was returned unserved with an endorsement that the addressee not claimed and hence returned to the sender. The returned notice was sent to the complainant on 30.12.2006. The complainant contends that the said notice was deemed to have been served as per Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. But the complaint in the lower Court was verified and signed by the complainant on 03.01.2007. It was presented in the lower Court on the same day i.e., on 03.01.2007. When the notice was returned unserved on 30.12.2006, the complainant should have waited for 15 days thereafter for payment. Without doing so, he rushed to the Court in about 4 days thereof. The offence under Section 138 of the Act becomes complete only after 15 days of receipt of the notice as per proviso (c) to Section 138 of the Act. In this case, the deemed service is on 30.12.2006 when the unclaimed notice was returned. In that view of the matter, the complaint in the lower Court was filed even before commission of the offence. The complaint is premature. 2) Hence, the Criminal Petition is allowed quashing proceedings in C.C. No.21 of 2007 on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Parchoor, Prakasam District. _______________________________ SAMUDRALA GOVINDARAJULU, J December 30, 2011 ksh