In M. Usman Vs. M.P. Muhammed Ali, Kerala High Court the court found that the revision petitioner was working abroad when notice under Sec.138(b) of the NI Act was issued at his residence, but he never evaded from the receipt of notice. Both courts failed to appreciate that position and convicted the accused. Therefore, the conviction and sentence passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Mattannur in S.T.C. No.1618/2003 which was modified by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Adhoc-I, Thalassery in Criminal Appeal No.360 of 2005 are set aside. The matter is remitted to the trial Court for fresh consideration.
Held: When complainant has the knowledge that the addressee left the place in search of a job outside India and knowing this fact, he sent notice and it was returned as addressee left India, there is no proper service of notice.
Held: When complainant has the knowledge that the addressee left the place in search of a job outside India and knowing this fact, he sent notice and it was returned as addressee left India, there is no proper service of notice.
Comments
Post a Comment