1. RULE. Ms. Falguni Patel, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives service of rule on behalf of respondent no. 1-State and Shri R.C. Jani, learned advocate waives service of rule on behalf of respondent no. 2.

2. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, the application is taken up for final hearing today.

3. The short but an interesting question of law posed for consideration of this Court is which date would be the relevant date for starting the limitation for filing the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

4. By way of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants-original accused have prayed for an appropriate order to quash and set aside Criminal Case No. 749/2007 pending in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ahmedabad filed by respondent no. 2-original complainant for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 as well as the order dated 09/02/2007 passed by the learned trial Court in the aforesaid Criminal Case issuing summons upon the applicants for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

5. A criminal case has been filed by respondent no. 2-original complainant against the applicants and others for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the Court of learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ahmedabad alleging interalia that the cheque for an amount of Rs. 3 Crore was issued by the applicants-original accused and when the said cheque was presented, the same came to be dishonoured/returned with an endorsement âSinsufficient balanceâý. It was the case on behalf of respondent no. 2-original complainant that thereafter the applicants were served with the legal notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and, thereafter, the applicants gave vague reply to the notice but did not make payment, and, therefore, the aforesaid criminal case came to be instituted against the applicants-original accused for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The learned trial Court issued summons upon the applicants and others by impugned order dated 09/02/2007 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Hence, the applicants-original accused have preferred the present Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the complaint.

6. Shri R.S. Sanjanwala, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants-original accused has vehemently submitted that the impugned complaint/criminal case is beyond the period of limitation as described under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It is submitted that the cheque in question was deposited on 09/12/2006 and the said cheque came to be dishonoured on 11/12/2006 and the bank returned the said cheque with an endorsement âSinsufficient balanceâý on 12/12/2006. Notice under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was issued by respondent no. 2-original complainant upon the applicants on 20/12/2006 and the said notice was received by the respective applicant on 22/12/2006 and the same was replied by the applicants on 05/01/2007 and was sent on 10/01/2007 and received by respondent no. 2-original complainant on 11/01/2007 and, thereafter, the impugned complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has been filed before the learned trial Court on 09/02/2007. It is submitted that as per Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is maintainable where a cheque has been presented within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier and the payee or the holder i