ORDER

The revision petitioner is the accused in the proceedings initiated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and stands sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh) as compensation under Section 357 (3)Cr.P.C. and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months.

2. The contention of the revision petitioner is that statutory notices contemplated under Section 138 of the N.I.Act has not been complied with. Hence, notice was not received and that there was no intimation given.

3. I find that it is the case of the complainant that the accused was running a financial institution and he deposited Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) and Ext.P1 impugned cheque was issued with a date one year after the date of deposit. The cheque when presented got dishonoured. Lawyer notice was sent both in his business address as well as in his residential address and both were returned unclaimed. There is evidence that the business of the accused closed and he was absconding. It is noted by the courts below that the accused has no CRL.R.P.NO. 815/2007 -2-

case that the addresses in the notice were incorrect. The evidence of DW1, the