Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

23. The accused except putting suggestions to PW1 in his cross- examination that no notice is not served on her, has failed to prove her correct address and also failed to elicit any fruitful information from the mouth of PW1 with respect to her correct address. Without any proof for her correct address and even without suggesting her correct address to PW1 in his cross-examination, mere a suggestion to PW1 that he has not sent the notice to her correct address and as such, no notice is served on her, which has been categorically denied by PW1 that itself is not sufficient to hold that the address disclosed in Ex.P3 notice is incorrect address and this PW1 has intentionally sent the notice to the wrong address of this accused and as such, the notice is not served on her.

36. Likewise, his further arguments that the accused only for the sake of the defence, during the cross-examination of PW1, has taken up the defence that the Complainant has not sent the notice to her correct address and therefore, no notice is served on her. He has argued that the accused has not furnished her correct address and even she has not produced any documents before this court to prove her correct address. He has argued that there is no documents before this court for the correct address of this accused and in such situation, mere a suggestion to PW1 during his cross-examination that no notice is served on her and even the address disclosed in Ex.P3 is incorrect address that itself is not sufficient to hold that this Complainant has not issued the notice to the correct address of this accused and the address disclosed in Ex.P3 is an incorrect address. He has argued that the accused to escape from her liability to pay the cheque amount and once she admits the receipt of the notice, she will be held liable to the cheque amount, has taken up the false defence during the course of trial. The arguments canvassed by the learned Counsel for the Complainant, is fully convinced this court.