JANARTHANAM, J.

T. S. Arunachalam, J., while hearing the arguments in this petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 489 of 1992 on the file of the XV Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras, raising the question as to whether the return by a Banker of a cheque unpaid bearing an endorsement 'account closed', will fall within the scope and ambit of the two contingencies, viz., 'insufficiency of the amount of money standing to the credit of the account of the person', or, it exceeded the amount arranged to be paid from that account of a person by an agreement with that Bank', giving rise to a cause of action for launching a prosecution by preference of a private complaint for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Act 26 of 1881) for short "the Act"), came to notice divergent views emerging from two learned Judges of this Court, Pratap Singh, J. and Padmini Jesudurai, J.

2. (a) In Binary Systems (P) Ltd. v. Noble Power (P) Ltd., Madras (1992 Mad LW (Crl) 307), Pratap Singh, J. was concerned with a cheque, which was returned with an endorsement 'stop payment'. Though in the head note, it