Both these revisions are being disposed of in this common order, since the issue raised in these petitions is same.

2. The petitioner is the accused in two private complaints in C.C. No. 3301/92 and C.C. No. 3299/92 on the file of the VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras. The said complaints were taken on file in June, 1992 for the offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. The allegation in these complaints is that the petitioner, in pursuance of an agreement of sale dated 5-5-89, issued two cheques to each of the parties in these two complaints towards the balance sale consideration and that when the cheques were deposited into the bank, the same were returned on account of insufficiency of funds and that in spite of the receipt of demand notice, the petitioner did not pay the cheque amount.

4. The petitioner on receipt of summons, filed applications, M.P. No. 1699/96 in C.C. No. 3301/92 and M.P. No. 1700/96 in C.C. No. 3299/92 for his discharge under section 245, Cr.P.C. The ground urged in the said petitions was that the cheques were issued only as a security and unless the sale transaction is completed, the petitioner is not liable to