JUDGMENT :- By this application the applicant/complainant seeks to challenge the judgment of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nanded, dated 18.12.2006, in SCC No.2071 of 2001 acquitting the respondent-accused for offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The predominant ground on which the trial Court had acquitted the respondent-accused is that the notice which was served to the respondent-accused was beyond the statutory period of 15 days. Mr. Agrawal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has stated that the cheque which was tendered by the accused was returned unpaid and the complainant was informed about the bouncing of the cheque on 19.4.2001. The notice which was sent on 3.5.2001 was within the period of 15 days of the complainant being informed about bouncing of the cheque. However, the aforesaid notice was returned back to the complainant with an endorsement that the house was locked and the accused does not reside at that address. The said notice was received back by the complainant on 10.5.2001. The complainant obviously chose not to rely upon the presumption available under section 27 of the General Clauses Act, and therefore, issued notice through messenger on 28.5.2001 which was received by the respondent accused. The notice which was received by the accused on 29.5.2001 was obviously beyond 15 days of the intimation regarding the bouncing of the cheque. 3. I have heard Mr. Agrawal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant with whose assistance I have perused the judgment. This is an appeal against acquittal. The view taken by the trial Court does not appear to be perverse and is a possible view to be taken on the basis of the evidence on record. In the light of that I do not notice any infirmity in the reasoning of the trial Court to warrant any interference in this appeal against acquittal. Consequently, application dismissed. Leave refused. Application dismissed.