Bombay High Court
Manvel S Tuscano vs State Of Maharashtra on 20 October, 2023
Bench: S. V. Kotwal
2023:BHC-AS:31561
Gokhale 1 of 5 11-wp-st-15369-23
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 15369 OF 2023
Manvel S. Tuscano ..Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Anr. ..Respondents
__________
Mr. Karan Bhosale a/w. Laveena Tejwani a/w. Ruchi Pawar i/b.
NDB Law for Petitioner.
Mr. Prashant Phophele i/b. PMH Law for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Arfan Sait, APP for State/Respondent No.1.
__________
CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.
DATE : 20 OCTOBER 2023
PC :
1. Heard Mr. Karan Bhosale, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Shri. Prashant Phophele, learned counsel for the
Respondent No.2 and Mr. Arfan Sait, learned APP for the
State/Respondent No.1.
2. The Petitioner was the original accused in
R.C.C.No.2521 of 2017 before the J.M.F.C., Panvel. The learned
Magistrate vide her Judgment and order dated 04.02.2023
convicted the petitioner for commission of the offence punishable
U/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2023 07:29:02 :::
2 of 5 11-wp-st-15369-23
referred to as 'N.I.Act') and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for one
year. The petitioner was directed to pay compensation of
Rs.2,60,00,000/- to the complainant i.e. Respondent No.2 herein
and in default to suffer S.I. for two months. The prosecution was
for dishonour of the cheque dated 08.06.2017 for
Rs.2,50,00,000/-.
3. The petitioner preferred an Appeal against the Judgment
and order of conviction before the Court of Sessions at Panvel vide
Criminal Appeal No.64 of 2023. The said Appeal is still pending
before the Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel. In the meantime, the
petitioner also prayed for suspension of the sentence and filed an
application for bail. Both these prayers were rejected by the
Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel, vide order dated 31.07.2023
passed below Exhibit-5 in Criminal Appeal No.64 of 2023. Both
learned counsel for the parties inform the Court that the petitioner
is not arrested as of today after his conviction.
4. The learned Sessions Judge made some observation as to
how the Appeal was protracted by the petitioner. The learned
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2023 07:29:02 :::
3 of 5 11-wp-st-15369-23
Sessions Judge also observed that the petitioner was required to
pay 20% of the amount of compensation awarded. This amount
was not deposited and on this ground the petitioner's prayers were
rejected. Being aggrieved by that order, the petitioner has
approached this Court by way of present writ petition. As
mentioned earlier, I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner, as well as, the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2
who was the original complainant.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the
petitioner is willing to deposit 20% of the compensation amount
which comes to Rs.52 lakhs. He submitted that, there is another
matter between the same parties which is also before this Court
vide Criminal Writ Petition (st) No.15322 of 2023. In that matter,
the compensation amount is Rs.1,10,00,000/- and 20% of that
amount comes to around Rs.22 lakhs. Thus, the consolidated
amount of 20% of the compensation together in both the cases
come to around Rs.74 lakhs. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that, he has Demand Draft of Rs.50 lakhs ready with him
which can be immediately deposited before the Trial Court and he
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2023 07:29:02 :::
4 of 5 11-wp-st-15369-23
seeks period of 10 days more to deposit balance amount of Rs.24
lakhs. Thus, the stand taken by the petitioner appears to be
reasonable and he can be permitted to deposit said amount during
that period before the trial Court. On that count, the sentence
imposed on the petitioner can be suspended till the decision of the
appeal.
6. Hence, the following order:
ORDER
1) The Petitioner is permitted to deposit 20% of the
consolidated amount of both the above matters
before the Trial Court, in the following way:
i) Rs.50,00,000/- shall be deposited by the
Petitioner before the Trial Court on or
before 25.10.2023 and he shall deposit
balance amount of Rs.24,00,000/- on or
before 03.11.2023.
2) The sentence imposed on the petitioner by the
Trial Court is suspended till the decision of the
petitioner's Appeal pending before the Additional
Sessions Judge, Panvel vide Criminal Appeal
No.64 of 2023.
5 of 5 11-wp-st-15369-23
3) The Respondent No.2 i.e. the original
complainant is permitted to make appropriate
application U/s.148(3) of the N.I.Act before the
Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel, for release of
the said amount during pendency of the Appeal;
subject to the proviso of Section 148(3) of the
N.I.Act. If such application is made, it shall be
decided in accordance with law.
4) If the petitioner does not deposit the said amount
as mentioned herein above, the Respondent No.2
is at liberty to make an application before this
Court for vacating this order.
5) With these directions the petition is disposed of.
(SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)
