IMPORTANT POINT

Question whether service of notice u/s 138(b) of Negotiable Instruments Act has been fraudulently refused by unscruplous means will be a question of fact to be decided on evidence and High Court ought not to exercise its jurisdiction u/s 482 Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT

B.P. Singh, J.—These seven appeals arise out of seven separate orders passed by a learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court on July 19, 2004 dismissing seven criminal petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the orders of the JMFC Medikeri issuing process against the appellant on the complaints filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘Act’).

2. The facts of the cases are similar and the same question arises for consideration in each of the appeals. The only distinction is that whereas in Criminal Appeal Nos. 1256 and 1257 of 2004 the notices sent to the appellant were returned with the endorsement “addressee always absent during delivery time. Hence returned to sender”, in the remaining five cases the notices were returned with the endorsement “party not in station. Arrival not known”.

3. The representative f