G. PATRI BASAVANA GOUD, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner in these two cases is facing prosecution for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('n. I. Act' for short), on the complaint under Section 200, Cr. P. C. filed by the respondents-complainants. The petitioner is aggrieved with the order of the learned Magistrate directing issuing of process against him.

( 2 ) ON the complaint being presented, the learned Magistrate took cognizance, recorded the sworn statements of the complainants, found sufficient ground to proceed, and accordingly directed issuing of summons for the offence under Section 138 of the N. I. Act. Sri Basavaraj Sabarad, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused would urge two grounds in support of his plea seeking quashing of the proceeding.

( 3 ) THE first ground is that, the petitioner-accused had no notice of the fact of dishonouring of the cheque allegedly issued by him, and that, there was no notice as contemplated under clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the N. I. Act. It is to be found that while Section 238 of the N. I. Act speaks of commission of an offence under the said provision where a cheque comes to be dishonoured, st

Click Here to Read the rest of this document