Munagala Bala Krishna vs Theta Venkata Ravi Kumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2858 AP

      THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

            CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.320 of 2021

ORDER:-

      This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and

401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.')

assailing the order dated 22.03.2021 passed in Crl.M.P.No.249 of

2021 in Crl.A.No.14 of 2021 on the file of VIII Additional District and

Sessions Court, Ongole, Prakasam District whereby the petition filed

by respondent No.1/accused under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C. seeking

suspension of the judgment and to enlarge him on bail was allowed.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner herein filed a

complaint on the allegation that respondent No.1 has committed

offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments

Act, 1881 (for short 'N.I. Act') and the same was numbered as C.C.87

of 2016. After full-fledged trial, the trial Court has convicted

respondent No.1 under Section 255(2) of Cr.P.C. and sentenced him

to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to

pay an amount of Rs.22,73,816/- towards compensation to the

petitioner herein and in default of payment, to undergo simple

imprisonment for thirty days. Aggrieved by the same, respondent

No.1 preferred an appeal along with an interlocutory application

before Sessions Court. The Sessions Court allowed the said

interlocutory application by suspending the sentence and enlarging

respondent No.1 on bail on the condition of his depositing 20% of the

compensation amount before the trial Court on or before 22.04.2021

and to file payment receipt. Aggrieved by the said condition, the

petitioner is before this Court.

3. Heard Sri K.Mohan Rami Reddy, learned counsel for the

petitioner, Sri K.K.Durga Prasad, learned counsel for respondent

No.1 and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of

respondent No.2-state.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Sessions

Court has directed respondent No.1 to deposit 20% of the

compensation amount which is contrary to the judgment passed by

the Hon'ble Apex Court wherein it was held that the accused is liable

to deposit 25% of the compensation amount. Learned counsel for the

petitioner placed reliance on order dated 10.08.2016 passed by a

composite High Court in Crl.P.No.11721 of 2016 wherein the accused

therein was directed to deposit 25% of the compensation amount and

when the same was challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it

was dismissed by order dated 10.08.2016 passed in Special Leave to

Appeal (Crl.) No.7228 of 2016.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

Court below ought to have suspended the sentence only after

depositing the compensation amount and if respondent No.1 is

released on bail on execution of personal bond for Rs.10,000/- by

virtue of the impugned order, it would be difficult to secure his

presence later. Hence, the order impugned requires to be set aside.

6. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submits that respondent

No.1 has already deposited 20% of the compensation amount in the

month of May, 2021. He submits that as per Section 148 of the N.I.

(Amendment) Act, the accused has to deposit 20% of the

compensation awarded by the trial Court and accordingly respondent

No.1 has deposited the amount.

7. This Court is unable to accept the contention raised by learned

counsel for the petitioner that the present condition imposed by the

Sessions Court is contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex

Court. In the order relied on by learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned Single Judge of this Court, while exercising discretion, in

view of the facts of that case, has directed to deposit 25% of the

amount but no ratio is laid down either by this Court or the Hon'ble

Apex Court that while suspending sentence, 25% of the amount shall

be deposited. Further the submission made by learned counsel for

the petitioner is contrary to the amended provisions of the N.I. Act.

Hence, this Court finds no merits in the case.

Accordingly the criminal revision case is dismissed.

As a sequel, all the pending miscellaneous applications are closed.

____________________________________ JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

Date : 04.08.2021 IKN

THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

Dismissed

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.320 of 2021

04.08.2021

IKN