Jaswinder Singh vs Punjab National Bank And Another

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 19852 P&H
Judgement Date : 8 November, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jaswinder Singh vs Punjab National Bank And Another on 8 November, 2024

Author: Karamjit Singh

Bench: Karamjit Singh

                                Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:145867




CRM-M-21624-2024                            [1]



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                                  CRM-M-21624-2024
                                                  Date of decision: 08.11.2024

Jaswinder Singh                                                     ...Petitioner

                                        Versus

Punjab National Bank and Another                                  ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH

Present:    Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.

            Mr. Arvind Rajotia, Advocate
            for respondent No.1-PNB.

            ****

KARAMJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner/accused seeking quashing of dated 05.03.2024 Annexure P-2 passed in Criminal Appeal No.131/2024 titled Jaswinder Singh Vs. Punjab National Bank and another, to the extent whereby the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the total amount of compensation awarded by the trial Court, as per provisions of Section 148 NI Act within a period of 60 days and in case of non compliance, the order of suspension of sentence shall automatically stands vacated in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col. S.S. Deswal Vs. Virender Gandhi.

2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.1 filed criminal complaint under Section 138 of NI Act against the petitioner wherein on conclusion of trial, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2024 23:29:57 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:145867 CRM-M-21624-2024 [2] RI for a period of two years and to pay compensation of Rs.12,00,000/- under Section 138 NI Act vide judgment and order dated 15.02.2024 by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sangrur. Being aggrieved, petitioner has preferred appeal against the said judgment and order and the Appellate Court vide order dated 05.03.2024 entertained the appeal and suspended the sentence of the petitioner during pendency of the appeal, subject to aforesaid deposit.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the learned lower Appellate Court failed to appreciate the facts in the right perspective and imposed the condition to deposit 20% of the compensation in a mechanical manner, without assigning any reasons and such a condition is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the law as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.2741 of 2023 (@ SLP(Crl.) Nos. 4927 of 2023 Jamboo Bhandari vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. and others, decided on 04.09.2023, wherein it was observed as follows:-

"6. What is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Hence, normally, Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the Appellate Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can be made for the reasons specifically recorded. 7. Therefore, when Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an petitioner who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said 4 conclusion must be recorded."

2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2024 23:29:57 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:145867 CRM-M-21624-2024 [3]

4. I have heard the counsel for the parties and gone through the impugned order and the case law referred by counsel for the petitioner and is of the view that the impugned order dated 05.03.2024 to the extent whereby petitioner is directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount awarded by trial Court is not passed by the Appellate Court in accordance with the afore-stated settled position of law.

5. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated 05.03.2024 to the extent whereby the condition of depositing of 20% of compensation amount awarded by the trial Court has been imposed for the purpose of suspension of sentence, is hereby set aside. The Appellate Court is directed to re-consider the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties and then to pass appropriate order in accordance with the law laid down in Jamboo Bhandari's case (supra) within a period of next two months of the date already fixed in the appeal and till then not to take any coercive action against the petitioner. The parties are directed to appear before the Appellate Court on the next date fixed in the appeal.



08.11.2024                                            (KARAMJIT SINGH)
Yogesh                                                    JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned:-              Yes/No
             Whether reportable:-                     Yes/No




                                3 of 3
             ::: Downloaded on - 12-11-2024 23:29:57 :::