Presumption of due service under cheque dishonour law upheld where notice was sent by registered post to the correct address.

When a Section 138(b) notice is sent by registered post to the accused's correct address, including the address reflected in an Aadhaar card, statutory presumptions of due service arise under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and Section 114 of the Evidence Act. The returned endorsement "left address" did not by itself displace that presumption, and the complaint was not required to separately plead that the accused evaded service or that deemed service was specifically averred. The Bombay HC held that the notice requirement was satisfied and rejected the revisional court's contrary view.

---

---

Issues: Whether service of notice for the purposes of Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act was duly complied with when the notice was sent to the address reflected in the accused's Aadhaar card and the envelope was returned with the endorsement "left address".

Analysis: The decision turned on the presumptions attached to dispatch of notice by registered post to the correct address. Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act support a presumption of due service, and in proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act it is unnecessary to plead that the addressee evaded service or that the complaint must specifically aver deemed service in the manner suggested by the revisional court. The endorsement on the returned envelope did not by itself displace the presumption, particularly when the notice was sent to the address taken from the accused's Aadhaar card and the complaint also asserted deliberate avoidance of service.

Conclusion: The notice requirement under Section 138(b) was held to be satisfied, and the revisional court's view that service was not properly effected was unsustainable.

Ratio Decidendi: When a notice under Section 138 is dispatched by registered post to the correct address, statutory presumptions of due service arise, and the complaint need not separately aver that the accused evaded service unless those presumptions are rebutted.

---