Heard.

2. The contention is that the applicant-accused could not have been convicted, for non compliance of Clause (b) of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In other words, according to the accused the Complainant had failed to send the demand notice to the accused within 15 days, as was then required, from the receipt of information by the Complainant from the Bank regarding the return of the cheque, unpaid.

3. The Respondent-Complainant has chosen to remain absent, though duly served.

4. The Complainant presented two cheques issued by the accused for collection, one dated 17-11-1998 for Rs.17,000/-, and the other dated 10-12-1998 for Rs.4000/- first on 20-2-1999, and then on 20-3-1999 and on 3-5-1999. On each of the occasions, they were returned dishonoured for insufficient funds. A notice dated 5-5-1999 was sent by the Complainant to the accused which the accused received on 28-5-1999 and the accused replied to it by letter dated 3-6-1999.

5. Obviously, the statutory demand notice had to be sent within 15 days, in terms of Section 138(b) of the Act, from the date of the receipt of information by the Complainant from the Bank regarding the return of