Sri Chinmaya Hegde vs Sri. Anant Komar
2021 Latest Caselaw 297 Kant

                             1



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                          BEFORE

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

              WRIT PETITION No.10847/2020 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

1.     SRI CHINMAYA HEGDE,
       PARTNER, M/S. MUNIVERSE TRAVERSING LLP,
       RESIDING AT NO.101, 8TH MAIN,
       11TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM,
       BENGALURU - 560 003.

2.     SRI HIMANSHU JOSHI,
       PARTNER, M/S MUNIVERSE TRAVERSING LLP,
       RESIDING AT NO.10, UTARAUDA BUILDING,
       BAGESHWAR,
       UTTARAKHAND- 263 632.                 ... PETITIONERS

              (BY SRI RAJESH RAO K., ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     SRI ANANT KOMAR,
       R/O BRIGADE PALM SPRINGS,
       APARTMENT NO.313, TOWER NO.2,
       24TH MAIN, J.P NAGAR, 7TH PHASE,
       PUTTENHALLI,
       BANGALORE - 560 078,
       REP. BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
       MR. SATISH HEBBAR.

2.     THE STATE OF KARNATAKA,
       REPRESENTED BY
       THE GOVERNMENT PLEADER,
                                 2



      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
      BENGALURU - 560 001.                        ... RESPONDENTS

              (BY SRI K.S. ABHIJITH, HCGP FOR R-2)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA READ WITH SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO DIRECT THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COURT
TO PASS AN ORDER TO MODIFY AND TO RELAX IN THE INTERIM
ORDER DATED 09.06.2020 AND BE PLEASED TO PASS AN ORDER
TO RECOVER THE SAME i.e., AT THE RATE OF 18 PERCENT OUT OF
THE DEPOSIT AMOUNT IF THE CONVICTION IS CONFIRMED.


      THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                           ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the

learned High Court Government Pleader appearing for

respondent No.2.

2. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of

the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying

this Court to modify and to relax the conditions imposed by the

Appellate Court in its interim order dated 09.06.2020.

3. The factual matrix of the case is that the respondent

No.1 herein had initiated the proceedings under Section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act ('N.I. Act' for short) and the Trial

Court convicted these petitioners. Hence, appeal was filed before

the Appellate Court in Crl.A.Nos.579/2020 and 580/2020. The

Appellate Court while suspending the sentence passed an order

to deposit 20% of the fine amount imposed on the appellants

before the Trial Court. Hence, the present petition is filed before

this Court by both the accused/appellants.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit

that the petitioners have got other alternative remedy to invoke

Section 421 of Cr.P.C. and hence the order impugned requires to

be quashed.

5. Having perused the grounds urged and also the

submissions of the learned counsel, there is no dispute with

regard to the fact that Section 138 proceedings was initiated

against these two petitioners and order of conviction was

passed. The Appellate Court while exercising the discretion,

directed to pay 20% of the fine amount while suspending the

sentence. It is important to note that an amendment was

brought to Section 148 of the N.I. Act in 2018 and envisaged the

powers vest with the Appellate Court. The amendment is very

clear that the Appellate Court may order to suspend the

sentence directing the appellants to deposit 20% of the fine

amount. The Appellate Court has not exceeded its limit while

passing the order of suspension of sentence. Hence, I do not find

any merit in the petition to quash the said order as sought in the

petition.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit

that the cheque amount is Rs.35 lakhs and directed to pay

Rs.50,00,000/- hence it is difficult to deposit the amount as the

same is a huge amount.

7. Having perused the judgment of the Trial Court and

the Appellate Court, the Appellate Court has directed to deposit

20% of the fine amount. Instead of directing 20% of the fine

amount, it is appropriate to direct the petitioners to pay 20% of

the cheque amount.

8. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

following:

ORDER

(i) The petition is disposed of accordingly.

      (ii)     The petitioners are directed to deposit 20%
               of   the   cheque       amount   in   two   equal

instalments. The petitioners are directed to deposit 50% of the 20% of the cheque amount within two weeks from today and the remaining 50% within eight weeks from today.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MD