1. - Heard learned counsel for the parties perused the revision petition and the order of the Court below.

2. In this revision petition, the accused petitioner is praying for quashing and setting aside the order dated 12.6.2003 of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Churu in Complaint Case No. 226/2003, whereby he took cognizance against the accused petitioner for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1882.

3. Only contention raised is that the notice sent by the complainant non petitioner No. 2 after dishonour of the cheque was not received by petitioner and the condition precedent for the prosecution of the petitioner is not satisfied.

4. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. Shakti Travel & Tours v. State of Bihar & Anr, (JT 2000 (7) SC 563).

5. On the other hand, Mr. Aacharya, learned counsel for the complainant non-petitioner No. 2 supported the order of the learned Trial Court.

6. Mr. Sharma, learned public prosecutor has passed over a copy of the complaint and therefrom, I find that specific averment has been made of the notice receive