Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Perepu Gowthami, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 28 October, 2024
APHC010459912024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA
PRADESH AT AMARAVATI [3368]
MONDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 7635/2024
Between:
1. PEREPU GOWTHAMI,, W/O SANTHOSH KUMAR,
HINDU, AGED 21 YEARS. RESIDING/AT D.NO. 23-112,
SRINIVASA NAGAR, EAST POINT COLONY,
SIMHACHALAM, VISAKHAPATNAM.
...PETITIONER/ACCUSED
AND
1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC
PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH,
AMARAVATI.
2. BODDAPALLI JAGGAMMA, W/O LATE B. NARASIMHAM,
HINDU, AGED 64 YEARS. RESIDING/AT D.NO. 40-30-15,
DHARMA NAGAR, KANCHARAPALEM,
VISAKHAPATNAM-530008.
...RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S):
2
Counsel for the Petitioner/accused:
1. SIMHACHALAM KARUKOLA
Counsel for the Respondent/complainant(S):
1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Court made the following:
3
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7635 OF 2024
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner/Accused,
under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
corresponding to Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 to quash the orders dated 24.06.2024 in
Crl.M.P.No.283 of 2024 in Crl.A.No.179 of 2024 passed by the
learned VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam
District.
2. Heard Sri Karukola Simhachalam, learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing
the State.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
learned Sessions Judge in the appeal against the conviction for
the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act passed the impugned order dated 27.05.2024 in
C.C.No.4318 of 2021 under Section 389(1) Cr.P.C., directed the
petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount ordered by
the learned Trial Judge within a period of two (02) months from
the date of the order, while suspending the sentence of
imprisonment awarded by the learned Magistrate. He would
submit that the order of the learned Sessions Judge is not in
accordance with Jamboo Bhandari v. MP State Industrial
Development Corporation Ltd's case.
4. The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor takes notice for
the State and would submit that the Appellate Court has power to
order the appellant to deposit such sum, which shall be a
minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation amount awarded by
the trial Court in an appeal against the conviction U/s.138 of
Negotiable Instruments Act.
5. This Court after following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the case of Surinder Singh Deswal @ Colonel
S.S.Deswal and others1, Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P.State
Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others2, and
reported judgment of this Court in Crl.P.No.5914 of 2024 dated
28.08.2024, by following the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court held that , "normally, the Appellate Court will be justified in
imposing condition of deposit as provided in section 148 of
N.I.A.ct. However, in a case, whether the Appellate Court is
satisfied with the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust,
2019 (11) SCC 341
2023 LiveLaw (SC) 776
exception can be made for the reason specifically recorded.
Hence, when the Appellate Court considers an application filed
U/s.389(3) Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 430 of BNSS by the
drawer of the cheque (accused), who was convicted for the
offence U/s.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the Appellant
Court has to consider whether it is exceptional case which
warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing
condition of deposit of 20% of fine/compensation amount. If the
Appellate Court comes to said conclusion that it is an exceptional
case, reasons for coming to such conclusion must be recorded".
6. In the case on hand, the impugned order of the learned
Appellate Court does not disclose anything that the learned
Appellate Court considered whether the cases in the exception or
not? i.e., whether it warrants grant of suspension of sentence
without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the
fine/compensation amount?
7. In those circumstances, the impugned order of the learned
Appellate Court is set side and restored the application filed by
the appellant U/s.389(1) Cr.P.C., corresponding to section 430 of
BNSS before the Appellate Court. The petitioner/accused shall
appear before the learned Appellate Court in 10 (ten) days from
the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such appearance, the
learned Appellate Court shall consider the application afresh and
dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably
within seven (07) days. Till then, the sentence imposed by the
learned trial Court stands suspended. If the petitioner/accused
fails to appear before the learned Appellate Court as directed
above, the Criminal Petition stands dismissed without recourse to
the Court.
8. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is disposed of at the
stage of admission.
As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any, shall
stand closed.
_________________________
JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI
28.10.2024.
Pmk
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.V.L.N. CHAKRAVARTHI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO:7635 OF 2024
Date: 28.10.2024
Pmk
