Facts and Procedural Background:

• Ashok Yeshwant Badave(Appellant), against whom proceedings were initiated for alleged dishonour of a cheque under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
• Surendra Madhavrao Nighojkar (Respondent) filed a complaint alleging that Badave issued a dishonoured cheque, violating terms under the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881.
• The Respondent sold his 1/3rd share of property in Satara to the Appellant’s family. During this sale, the Appellant issued a cheque for Rs. 46,000 dated 20.01.1996, which was subsequently dishonoured due to a “closed account” status on 11.07.1996. The Respondent claimed this constituted cheating and issued a legal notice, filing a complaint due to non-payment.
• The complaint was filed on 2.9.1996 in the Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court, Satara, alleging offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate took cognizance and issued a process against the Appellant based on the complaint.
• The Appellant challenged the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate before the Sessions Court, seeking revision; however, the Sessions Court upheld the issuance of process against the Appellant.
• Thereafter, the Appellant filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, which was dismissed, affirming the orders of both the Magistrate and Sessions Court.
• The Appellant, on special leave, has now moved this Court, contending that no offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was committed.

Main issue:

Whether the 6 month presentation period for a cheque under Section 138(a) of the Negotiable Instruments Act should be calculated from the date on the cheque or from the earlier delivery date by the drawer to the drawee?