SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1231/2006 Sheikh Abdul Majeed Vs. Sageer Ahemed @ Heeraji & Anr. { 1 } S.B. Cr. Misc. Petition No.1231/2006 Sheikh Abdul Majeed vs Sageer Ahemed @ Heeraji & Anr. DATE OF ORDER : - 8.7.2008 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.Sumeet Mehta, for the petitioner. Mr.VR Mehta, PP. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has challenged the order of the trial court dated 11th Nov., 2002 passed in Cr. Case No.316/2002 by which the learned trial court took the cognizance for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that no notice was given to the petitioner before launching this prosecution by the complainant. It is also submitted that petitioner is resident of Rajsamand and there is no notice or copy of the notice available on record which was sent by the complainant to the petitioner. It is also submitted that no notice was ever served upon the petitioner demanding the amount of the cheque from the petitioner. I perused the record and found that cheque SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1231/2006 Sheikh Abdul Majeed Vs. Sageer Ahemed @ Heeraji & Anr. { 2 } no.275469 has been signed by petitioner as S.A. Mazeed. Copy of the notice placed on record as Ex.6 has been issued in the name of two accused Abdul Wahid and Abdul Mazeed both sons of Late Abdul Gani Sheikh. There is clear reference of cheque no.275469 dated 21st March, 2002 in the said notice given by the complainant demanding the cheque amount from the petitioner and in default thereof he clearly stated that he will launched prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The complainant in his complaint stated that notice was served upon the petitioner whereas the accused no.2 refused to accept the notice. The complainant has placed on record the original acknowledgment receipt which is Ex.8 which has been signed by the petitioner. On the basis of the above evidence, if the court has taken cognizance, the petitioner approached this court under wrong impression that the notice was not given to the petitioner by the complainant before filing the present criminal complaint. The above observation on factual position will not have any bearing on the merit of the case because of the reason that this Court only examined whether there is sufficient material SB Cr. Misc. Petition No.1231/2006 Sheikh Abdul Majeed Vs. Sageer Ahemed @ Heeraji & Anr. { 3 } available on record for taking cognizance or not. This court found that there was sufficient material for taking cognizance and I do not find any merit in this misc. petition. Hence, the misc. petition is dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.Goyal/-