Goutam Bhuduri, J.— By this petition, the challenge is made to the cognizance taken under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short “the NI Act”) whereby the notices were issued to the petitioner accused by the Court of J.M.F.C, Raipur on 31.8.2009.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent had filed a complaint on 17.8.2009 before the JMFC, Raipur, on the ground that the cheque worth Rs.90,000 was dishonoured for want of money. The cheque drawn on Central Bank of India bearing No. 142789 dated 24.3.2009 was issued in favour of the respondent and on being presented, it was dishonoured on account of insufficient funds. It is alleged that respondent thereafter issued a demand notice to the petitioner accused on 25.7.2009 through her advocate as required under the Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the said notice, the address of the petitioner was wrongly mentioned, as such, the presumption cannot be drawn that the service of notice was effected. He, therefore, submits that Section 138B mandates that the service of notice to be effected and mere sending of the notice will not comply with