N.G. Nandi, J. - In this petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") the petitioner has been praying to quash the complaint case titled Ashok Kumar Sharma v. Yoginder Kumar Sharma", pending in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Shahdara, Delhi.

2. It has been mainly contended by Mr. M.R. Chawla, learned Counsel for the petitioner that a cheque issued can be presented for realisation as many times as one wants within the validity period of the cheque but once the cheque returns dishonoured and notice under clause (b) of proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") is served by the payee/holder in due course, then the complaint has to be filed within one month from the date of the receipt of the notice by the drawer on failure to make the payment. It is further contended that the telegraphic demand by the payee after the return of the cheque should be treated as a notice under clause (b) of proviso to Section 138 of the Act. In this regard reliance has been placed on the decision in the case of M/s. SIL Import, U.S.A. v. M/s Exim Aides Silk