Judgment This appeal is directed against acquittal of the first respondent in a prosecution launched for the offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court below found all the points in favour of the complainant, but came to the conclusion that the statutory notice was defective as it was despatched beyond 15 days of intimation about the bouncing of the cheques, Exs.P-2 and P-3 dated 19.8.1996 and 3.1.1997 for Rs.44, 500 and 25, 000 respectively. 2. The cheques were presented in the bank and the bouncing of the cheques was informed to the complainant-appellant as per Ex.P-4 dated 25.1.1997. Ex.P-8 is the notice. Though, it is dated 11.2.1997, it was really posted only on 13.2.1997. If the days are reckoned from the date of Ex.P-4, namely, 25.1.1997, it is beyond 15 days. Statutory notice ought to have been issued within 15 days of intimation about the bouncing. So the Court below concluded that the notice was beyond the time provided for. 3. It is contended by the appellant that even in para 4 of the complaint it has been clearly mentioned that dishonour was intimated on 3.2.1997. The same fact was mentioned in the notice as well. Ex.P-4, also discloses that the bank had sent it by registered post on 25.1.1997. In such circumstances, it was not possible to receive the memo on the same date itself. Necessarily, reckoning from 13.2.1997 the date of receipt of information, the notice despatched on 3.2.1997 is within the time, it is contended. 4. As per proviso (b) to Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as it stood at the material point of time, the notice to the drawer of the cheque shall be within 15 days, “of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid”. That means, information passed on to the complainant. When the complainant has specifically averred that he the absence of any dispute on that count, it could not be taken that he had received intimation on 25.1.1997 itself, especially when it is seen from Ex.P-4 that it was sent by registered post on that date. When the averment in the complaint and the facts mentioned in the notice are taken note of, Ex.P-8 notice is within the time provided for in the statute. When the averment in the complaint and the facts mentioned in the notice are taken note of, Ex.P-8 notice is within the time provided for in the statute. Necessarily, when the finding of the Court below in that regard is reversed, it is clear, based on the findings on other points, that the first respondent-accused is guilty of the offence punishable under Sec.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 5. The total amount of the cheque is Rs.69, 500. In such circumstances, I am of the view that the accused shall be sentenced as follows. (1) He shall undergo imprisonment for a day, on a date to be fixed by the Court below. (2) He shall also pay a compensation of Rs.72, 000 (Rupees Seventy Two Thousand only) which if realised shall be paid to the complainant. The default in payment of compensation shall result in imprisonment for a term of three months. This appeal is allowed as above. V.K.-----Appeal allowed.