AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 141
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar in complaint case no. 82 of 2020 (Ritesh Kumar Singh vs. Panki Indane Gas Service through Prashant Chaudhary) filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, whereby the petitioner was summoned to face trial for an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and also the order dated 20.01.2023 passed in Criminal Revision No. 29 of 2023 (Panki Indane Gas Service through Prashant Chaudhary vs. Ritesh Kumar Singh and Another), whereby the order of the trial court was affirmed. 3. The relevant facts are as below:- The respondent-Ritesh Kumar Singh filed a complaint under section 138 read with section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dealt with each one of the objections/contentions raised by the revisionist and gave findings in para nos. 8, 9, 10 and 11 of the order. Learned revisional court observed that when a registered notice has been sent, there shall be a presumption, unless otherwise shown, that the notice was served in usual course. The revisional court referred to the judgment of Supreme Court in C.C. Alavi Haji vs. Palapetty Muhammed, (2007) 6 SCC 555. 7. The only point which has been specifically and vehemently pressed before this court is that it was nowhere written in the complaint as to when the notice was served on the accused. It is further argued that no evidence has been given to demonstrate that notice was served on a particular date. The contenti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... determining the period of notice, which is one month, from such a date), the date of notice given by the drawee/payee to the drawer/payer of the cheque (to determine fifteenth day so as to bring "cause of action" to life, in case the chque money is not paid during this period), the date on which the said notice is received or served to the drawer/payer of the cheque (to determine the date on which the offence is made out, in case the cheque money is not paid within fifteen days of the service of the notice) and lastly, the date of filing of the complaint (for determining the jurisdiction of the Court to entertain the complaint within the prescribed period of limitation and complaint not being time-barred). If these dates are not perceptibl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs to the Court that the common course of business renders it probable that a thing would happen, the Court may draw presumption that the thing would have happened, unless there are circumstances in a particular case to show that the common course of business was not followed. Thus, Section 114 enables the Court to presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business in their relation to the facts of the particular case. Consequently, the court can presume that the common course of business has been followed in particular cases. When applied to communications sent by post, Section 114 enables the Court to presume that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... have knowledge of the notice. Unless and until the contrary is proved by the addressee, service of notice is deemed to have been effected at the time at which the letter would have been delivered in the ordinary course of business. This Court has already held that when a notice is sent by registered post and is returned with a postal endorsement 'refused' or 'not available in the house' or 'house locked' or 'shop closed' or 'addressee not in station', due service has to be presumed. [Vide Jagdish Singh Vs. Natthu Singh (1992) 1 SCC 647; State of M.P. Vs. Hiralal & Ors. (1996) 7 SCC 523 and V.Raja Kumari Vs. P.Subbarama Naidu & Anr. (2004) 8 SCC 74] It is, therefore, manifest that in view of the presu....