Judgment 1. THIS revisional petition is directed against the order dated 1st October, 1996 passed by Learned 12th Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta in Complaint case No. C-1629/96. 2. THE opposite party issued three cheques in favour of the petitioner. Before the cheques were presented, the opposite party requested the petitioner not to present the cheques and raised certain disputes. The petitioner presented the cheques and they bounced. Hence the petitioner filed a petition of complaint under Section 138 of the negotiable Instruments Act and also under Section 420 Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate rightly held that before the cheques are presented, if the drawee is duly informed by the drawer of the cheques not to present the cheques in the Bank for encashment, it does not amount to an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. (See K. K. Sidhrthan v. T. P. Prasanna chandran, 1996 (2) SCC 465 : [vol. 2 DCTC 557].) 3. SO far as Learned Magistrate's order regarding not taking cognizance of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned it is legal and cannot be interfered with. The learned Magistrate however should have taken cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 420 Indian Penal Code. 4. THE impugned order is, therefore, set aside and the learned Magistrate is directed to hold further enquiry into the complaint. The petition is disposed of accordingly. 5. THE ld. Counsel for the opposite parties is directed to file his Vakalatnama during the course of the day. 6. LET a plain copy of this order duly countersigned by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to the ld. Counsel for the petitioner on usual undertaking. Order accordingly.