{"id":33488,"date":"2026-10-02T08:17:37","date_gmt":"2026-10-02T08:17:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=33488"},"modified":"2026-10-02T08:19:56","modified_gmt":"2026-10-02T08:19:56","slug":"section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/","title":{"rendered":"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<h1 id=\"h-service-of-the-section-138-notice-by-registered-post-receipt-by-a-family-member\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Service_of_the_Section_138_Notice_by_Registered_Post_Receipt_by_a_Family_Member\"><\/span>Service of the Section 138 Notice by Registered Post: Receipt by a Family Member<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h1>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala-2026-insc-1069-and-the-presumption-of-service\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Sainaba_v_State_of_Kerala_2026_INSC_1069_and_the_Presumption_of_Service\"><\/span>Sainaba v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 1069) and the Presumption of Service<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 30 September 2026, a Bench of Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Manmohan JJ. decided <em>Sainaba v. State of Kerala &amp; Anr.<\/em>, 2026 INSC 1069. The Court held that a statutory notice dispatched by registered post to the drawer&#8217;s correct address satisfies proviso (b) to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, even where a family member signs for it. The Kerala High Court&#8217;s revisional order was set aside and the conviction restored. The Court also declared <em>M.D. Thomas v. P.S. Jaleel<\/em>, (2009) 14 SCC 398, per incuriam.<\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_88 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #0c0c0c;color:#0c0c0c\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-1'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#Service_of_the_Section_138_Notice_by_Registered_Post_Receipt_by_a_Family_Member\" >Service of the Section 138 Notice by Registered Post: Receipt by a Family Member<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-2' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#Sainaba_v_State_of_Kerala_2026_INSC_1069_and_the_Presumption_of_Service\" >Sainaba v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 1069) and the Presumption of Service<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#I_The_Facts_and_the_Decisions_Below\" >I. The Facts and the Decisions Below<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#II_The_Statutory_Frame\" >II. The Statutory Frame<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#Key_Statutory_Points\" >Key Statutory Points<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#III_The_Line_of_Authority\" >III. The Line of Authority<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#1_K_Bhaskaran_v_Sankaran_Vaidhyan_Balan_1999_7_SCC_510\" >1. K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan, (1999) 7 SCC 510<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#2_D_Vinod_Shivappa_v_Nanda_Belliappa_2006_6_SCC_456\" >2. D. Vinod Shivappa v. Nanda Belliappa, (2006) 6 SCC 456<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#3_CC_Alavi_Haji_v_Palapetty_Muhammed_2007_6_SCC_555_Three_Judges\" >3. C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed, (2007) 6 SCC 555 (Three Judges)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#4_Ajeet_Seeds_Ltd_v_K_Gopala_Krishnaiah_2014_12_SCC_685\" >4. Ajeet Seeds Ltd. v. K. Gopala Krishnaiah, (2014) 12 SCC 685<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#IV_What_Sainaba_Decides\" >IV. What Sainaba Decides<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#Dispatch_to_the_Correct_Address_Completes_the_%E2%80%9CGiving%E2%80%9D\" >Dispatch to the Correct Address Completes the &#8220;Giving&#8221;<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#Receipt_by_a_Family_Member_Is_Not_a_Defect\" >Receipt by a Family Member Is Not a Defect<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#The_Burden_Shifts_to_the_Drawer\" >The Burden Shifts to the Drawer<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#MD_Thomas_Is_Not_Binding\" >M.D. Thomas Is Not Binding<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#How_the_Presumption_Stood_Unrebutted\" >How the Presumption Stood Unrebutted<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-17\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#V_Practitioners_Checklist\" >V. Practitioner&#8217;s Checklist<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-18\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#For_the_Complainant\" >For the Complainant<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-19\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#For_the_Accused\" >For the Accused<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-20\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#VI_Conclusion\" >VI. Conclusion<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-21\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#VII_Citation_Table\" >VII. Citation Table<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-i-the-facts-and-the-decisions-below\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"I_The_Facts_and_the_Decisions_Below\"><\/span>I. The Facts and the Decisions Below<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The complainant lent Rs. 3,00,000 to the accused, who issued a cheque that was dishonoured. A statutory notice dated 31 August 2016 went by registered post to the accused&#8217;s address and was received by his mother. There was no payment and no reply.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Trial Court convicted the accused on 10 July 2019 and imposed six months&#8217; simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 3,00,000. The appellate court upheld that on 16 February 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Kerala High Court, in revision under Section 397 CrPC, set the conviction aside on 29 July 2025, reasoning that the complainant had not shown the accused knew of the notice his mother received.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-ii-the-statutory-frame\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"II_The_Statutory_Frame\"><\/span>II. The Statutory Frame<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Proviso (b) to Section 138 requires the payee to give notice in writing within 30 days of information of dishonour. Section 94 of the Act leaves the mode of service open, so post is not mandatory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Where the sender posts by registered post, Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 deems service to be effected at the time the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course, unless the contrary is proved. Section 114 of the Evidence Act, 1872 supports the same inference (now Section 119 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-key-statutory-points\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Key_Statutory_Points\"><\/span>Key Statutory Points<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Provision<\/th><th>Legal Point<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td>Proviso (b) to Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881<\/td><td>Requires the payee to give notice in writing within 30 days of information of dishonour.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Section 94, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881<\/td><td>Leaves the mode of service open, so post is not mandatory.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Section 27, General Clauses Act, 1897<\/td><td>Provides the statutory presumption relating to service when a letter is properly addressed and sent by post.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Section 114, Evidence Act, 1872<\/td><td>Supports the inference relating to service.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td>Section 119, Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023<\/td><td>Now contains the corresponding provision referred to in the article.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-iii-the-line-of-authority\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"III_The_Line_of_Authority\"><\/span>III. The Line of Authority<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-1-k-bhaskaran-v-sankaran-vaidhyan-balan-1999-7-scc-510\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"1_K_Bhaskaran_v_Sankaran_Vaidhyan_Balan_1999_7_SCC_510\"><\/span>1. K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan, (1999) 7 SCC 510<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court read Section 27 of the General Clauses Act into Section 138. Where the sender has dispatched the notice by post to the correct address, service is deemed on the addressee unless he proves that it was not served and that he was not responsible for the non-service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-2-d-vinod-shivappa-v-nanda-belliappa-2006-6-scc-456\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"2_D_Vinod_Shivappa_v_Nanda_Belliappa_2006_6_SCC_456\"><\/span>2. D. Vinod Shivappa v. Nanda Belliappa, (2006) 6 SCC 456<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Court distinguished &#8220;giving&#8221; of notice from &#8220;receipt&#8221; and held that a drawer cannot defeat the provision by making himself unavailable. The presumption of service remains open to rebuttal on the drawer&#8217;s own showing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-3-c-c-alavi-haji-v-palapetty-muhammed-2007-6-scc-555-three-judges\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"3_CC_Alavi_Haji_v_Palapetty_Muhammed_2007_6_SCC_555_Three_Judges\"><\/span>3. C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed, (2007) 6 SCC 555 (Three Judges)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is the controlling authority. The Bench of Balakrishnan CJI, Raveendran and D.K. Jain JJ. held:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">&#8220;In our opinion, therefore, when the notice is sent by registered post by correctly addressing the drawer of the cheque, the mandatory requirement of issue of notice in terms of Clause (b) of proviso to Section 138 of the Act stands complied with.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">It added a practical safety valve for a drawer who says he never received the notice:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">&#8220;A person who does not pay within 15 days of receipt of the summons from the court along with the copy of the complaint under Section 138 of the Act, cannot obviously contend that there was no proper service of notice as required under Section 138, by ignoring statutory presumption to the contrary under Section 27 of the GC Act and Section 114 of the Evidence Act.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-4-ajeet-seeds-ltd-v-k-gopala-krishnaiah-2014-12-scc-685\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"4_Ajeet_Seeds_Ltd_v_K_Gopala_Krishnaiah_2014_12_SCC_685\"><\/span>4. Ajeet Seeds Ltd. v. K. Gopala Krishnaiah, (2014) 12 SCC 685<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The High Court had quashed a complaint because it did not recite service of the notice. The Supreme Court restored it, holding that service is a matter of evidence and need not be averred. It stated:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<blockquote class=\"wp-block-quote is-layout-flow wp-block-quote-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">&#8220;Section 27 of the GC Act gives rise to a presumption that service of notice has been effected when it is sent to the correct address by registered post.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-iv-what-sainaba-decides\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"IV_What_Sainaba_Decides\"><\/span>IV. What Sainaba Decides<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-dispatch-to-the-correct-address-completes-the-giving\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dispatch_to_the_Correct_Address_Completes_the_%E2%80%9CGiving%E2%80%9D\"><\/span>Dispatch to the Correct Address Completes the &#8220;Giving&#8221;<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Dispatch to the correct address completes the &#8220;giving&#8221;. The complainant need not prove actual receipt by the drawer, or that the drawer evaded service.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-receipt-by-a-family-member-is-not-a-defect\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Receipt_by_a_Family_Member_Is_Not_a_Defect\"><\/span>Receipt by a Family Member Is Not a Defect<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Receipt by a family member is not a defect. The Court held that identity of the recipient does not matter if the notice went to the correct address. Otherwise a complainant whose notice is delivered would fare worse than one whose notice is never delivered at all, and the latter already enjoys the presumption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-the-burden-shifts-to-the-drawer\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"The_Burden_Shifts_to_the_Drawer\"><\/span>The Burden Shifts to the Drawer<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The burden shifts to the drawer. In the Court&#8217;s words, once the notice was dispatched to the correct address, it was incumbent on the drawer to establish &#8220;either that the address was incorrect or that he had no knowledge of the notice having been brought to his address&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-m-d-thomas-is-not-binding\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"MD_Thomas_Is_Not_Binding\"><\/span>M.D. Thomas Is Not Binding<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>M.D. Thomas<\/em> is not binding.* That two-Judge decision set aside a conviction because the notice reached the drawer&#8217;s wife. It did not consider <em>Alavi Haji<\/em>* and was held per incuriam. The Court said it &#8220;cannot be treated as binding precedent under Article 141&#8221;.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-how-the-presumption-stood-unrebutted\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"How_the_Presumption_Stood_Unrebutted\"><\/span>How the Presumption Stood Unrebutted<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The accused appeared on summons served at the same address. His vakalatnama, appeal and revision petitions carried the same address. He did not dispute the address in his Section 313 CrPC statement. He did not say that he and his mother lived apart or were on bad terms. The trial court record, Ext. P5, showed that his mother received the notice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-v-practitioner-s-checklist\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"V_Practitioners_Checklist\"><\/span>V. Practitioner&#8217;s Checklist<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-for-the-complainant\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"For_the_Complainant\"><\/span>For the Complainant<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Send the notice by registered post to the address in the cheque, the bank records or the agreement. Keep the postal receipt and the acknowledgement or tracking record.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Plead dispatch to the correct address. Do not rely on proving who signed for the notice.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Place on record every later document showing the accused uses the same address.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 id=\"h-for-the-accused\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"For_the_Accused\"><\/span>For the Accused<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>If the address is wrong, say so at the first opportunity and prove it. Silence in the Section 313 statement was fatal in <em>Sainaba<\/em>.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>To say that the notice never came to your knowledge, lead evidence of separate residence or a strained relationship with the recipient.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Under <em>Alavi Haji<\/em>, a drawer who claims non-receipt can still pay within 15 days of receiving the summons and the complaint. Failing to do so weakens the defence.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Do not rely on <em>M.D. Thomas<\/em> for family-member service. It is no longer good law.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-vi-conclusion\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"VI_Conclusion\"><\/span>VI. Conclusion<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>Sainaba<\/em> closes a gap that the Kerala High Court had opened and that <em>M.D. Thomas<\/em> had made available. The question under proviso (b) is whether the notice was properly addressed and posted, not who signed for it. The drawer keeps one real defence, which is to prove the address was wrong or that the notice never reached his knowledge, and he must do so by evidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 id=\"h-vii-citation-table\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"VII_Citation_Table\"><\/span>VII. Citation Table<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-table\"><table class=\"has-fixed-layout\"><thead><tr><th>Case<\/th><th>Citation \/ Details<\/th><th>Key Point<\/th><\/tr><\/thead><tbody><tr><td><em>Sainaba v. State of Kerala &amp; Anr.<\/em><\/td><td>2026 INSC 1069; 1005; SLP (Crl.) No. 17180\/2025; decided 30.09.2026 (Amanullah and Manmohan JJ.)<\/td><td>Service of a Section 138 notice by registered post at the correct address remains sufficient even where a family member receives it.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><em>C.C. Alavi Haji v. Palapetty Muhammed<\/em><\/td><td>(2007) 6 SCC 555; 2007 INSC 627; (2007) 7 SCALE 380; Crl.A. 767\/2007; 18.05.2007 (Balakrishnan CJI, Raveendran and D.K. Jain JJ.)<\/td><td>Correctly addressed registered-post notice satisfies the mandatory requirement of giving notice.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><em>M.D. Thomas v. P.S. Jaleel<\/em><\/td><td>(2009) 14 SCC 398<\/td><td>Considered in <em>Sainaba<\/em> and held per incuriam.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><em>K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan<\/em><\/td><td>(1999) 7 SCC 510<\/td><td>Section 27 General Clauses Act imported into Section 138 notices.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><em>D. Vinod Shivappa v. Nanda Belliappa<\/em><\/td><td>(2006) 6 SCC 456; 2006 INSC 364; 25.05.2006<\/td><td>&#8220;Giving&#8221; of notice is not the same as receipt.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><em>Ajeet Seeds Ltd. v. K. Gopala Krishnaiah<\/em><\/td><td>(2014) 12 SCC 685; 16.07.2014 (Desai and Ramana JJ.)<\/td><td>Section 114 Evidence Act with Section 27 GC Act; no need to aver service.<\/td><\/tr><tr><td><em>MSR Leathers v. S. Palaniappan<\/em><\/td><td>(2013) 1 SCC 177<\/td><td>Cited only for the three conditions in the proviso.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Written By: Inder Chand Jain<\/strong><br>Ph no: 8279945021, Email: inderjain2007@rediffmail.com<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-yoast-seo-related-links yoast-seo-related-links\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/dishonour-of-cheque-and-its-laws\/\">Dishonour Of Cheque And Its Laws<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/cheque-dishonour-due-to-account-freezing-section-138-ni-act\/\">Cheque Dishonour from Frozen Account \u2013 Is Section 138 NI Act Attracted?<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/a-honourable-dissent-reconsidering-the-doctrine-of-personal-liability-for-authorized-signatories-under-section-138-of-the-negotiable-instruments-act-1881\/\">A Honourable Dissent: Reconsidering The Doctrine Of Personal Liability For Authorized Signatories Under Section 138 Of The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/legal-framework-governing-dishonour-of-cheques-in-india-and-the-role-of-police\/\">Legal Framework Governing Dishonour of Cheques in India and the Role of Police<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/the-negotiable-instruments-act-1881-legal-framework-governing-cheques-bills-and-promissory-notes\/\">The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881: Legal Framework Governing Checks, Bills, and Promissory Notes<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Service of the Section 138 Notice by Registered Post: Receipt by a Family Member Sainaba v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 1069) and the Presumption of Service On 30 September 2026, a Bench of Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Manmohan JJ. decided Sainaba v. State of Kerala &amp; Anr., 2026 INSC 1069. The Court held that a<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":73,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_bbp_topic_count":0,"_bbp_reply_count":0,"_bbp_total_topic_count":0,"_bbp_total_reply_count":0,"_bbp_voice_count":0,"_bbp_anonymous_reply_count":0,"_bbp_topic_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_reply_count_hidden":0,"_bbp_forum_subforum_count":0,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"two_page_speed":[],"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"_joinchat":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[4765],"class_list":["post-33488","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-banking-finance-laws","tag-banking-finance-laws"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v28.4 (Yoast SEO v28.6) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala - Legal Service India - Articles<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Supreme Court in Sainaba v. Kerala clarifies Section 138 notice service, family-member receipt, registered post, and presumption of service.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Supreme Court in Sainaba v. Kerala clarifies Section 138 notice service, family-member receipt, registered post, and presumption of service.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Legal Service India - Articles\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-10-02T08:17:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-10-02T08:19:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Inder Jain\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@legalserviceind\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Inder Jain\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Inder Jain\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/ad1e46eba703bd5bc7788cc8bb7cca20\"},\"headline\":\"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-02T08:17:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-02T08:19:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1445,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"Banking &amp; Finance laws\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Banking &amp; Finance laws\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/\",\"name\":\"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala - Legal Service India - Articles\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-02T08:17:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-02T08:19:56+00:00\",\"description\":\"The Supreme Court in Sainaba v. Kerala clarifies Section 138 notice service, family-member receipt, registered post, and presumption of service.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Banking & Finance laws > Section 138 Cheque Bounce Notice: Is Service on a Family Member Valid? Supreme Court Clarified\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India - Law Articles\",\"description\":\"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Legal Service India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/06\\\/logo-circle-1.png\",\"width\":105,\"height\":95,\"caption\":\"Legal Service India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/legalservicesind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legalserviceind\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/ad1e46eba703bd5bc7788cc8bb7cca20\",\"name\":\"Inder Jain\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/13e802d35a283dba679d3529a0380965?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"url\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/13e802d35a283dba679d3529a0380965?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"contentUrl\":\"\\\/\\\/www.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/13e802d35a283dba679d3529a0380965?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm\",\"caption\":\"Inder Jain\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalserviceindia.com\\\/Legal-Articles\\\/author\\\/inderjain\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala - Legal Service India - Articles","description":"The Supreme Court in Sainaba v. Kerala clarifies Section 138 notice service, family-member receipt, registered post, and presumption of service.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala","og_description":"The Supreme Court in Sainaba v. Kerala clarifies Section 138 notice service, family-member receipt, registered post, and presumption of service.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/","og_site_name":"Legal Service India - Articles","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","article_published_time":"2026-10-02T08:17:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-10-02T08:19:56+00:00","author":"Inder Jain","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legalserviceind","twitter_site":"@legalserviceind","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Inder Jain","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/"},"author":{"name":"Inder Jain","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/ad1e46eba703bd5bc7788cc8bb7cca20"},"headline":"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala","datePublished":"2026-10-02T08:17:37+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-02T08:19:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/"},"wordCount":1445,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"keywords":["Banking &amp; Finance laws"],"articleSection":["Banking &amp; Finance laws"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/","name":"Section 138 Notice to Family Member: Supreme Court Ruling in Sainaba v. State of Kerala - Legal Service India - Articles","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-10-02T08:17:37+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-02T08:19:56+00:00","description":"The Supreme Court in Sainaba v. Kerala clarifies Section 138 notice service, family-member receipt, registered post, and presumption of service.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/section-138-notice-service-family-member-sainaba-v-state-of-kerala\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Banking & Finance laws > Section 138 Cheque Bounce Notice: Is Service on a Family Member Valid? Supreme Court Clarified"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","name":"Legal Service India - Law Articles","description":"Legal Service India - Law Article Directory is the oldest in India since 2000, with thousands of article written by lawyers, law Students and Scholars on all branches of law","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#organization","name":"Legal Service India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/logo-circle-1.png","width":105,"height":95,"caption":"Legal Service India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/legalservicesind","https:\/\/x.com\/legalserviceind","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LegalServiceIndia-lsi"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/#\/schema\/person\/ad1e46eba703bd5bc7788cc8bb7cca20","name":"Inder Jain","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/13e802d35a283dba679d3529a0380965?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","url":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/13e802d35a283dba679d3529a0380965?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","contentUrl":"\/\/www.gravatar.com\/avatar\/13e802d35a283dba679d3529a0380965?s=96&#038;r=g&#038;d=mm","caption":"Inder Jain"},"url":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/author\/inderjain\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33488","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/73"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33488"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33488\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33525,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33488\/revisions\/33525"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33488"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33488"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33488"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}