Kerala High Court
Sreedevi Biju vs Meenu.V.A on 23 May, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 4337 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06.03.2024 IN CRMP NO.965 OF 2024 IN CRA
NO.55 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA
PETITIONER/ APPELLANT :
SREEDEVI BIJU
AGED 45 YEARS
W/O.BIJU VASUDEVAN, BIJU BHAVANAM,
KATTUNGALKAMBIKKAKAM, THONDANKULANGARA WARD,
AVALUKUNNU.P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688006, PRESENTLY
RESIDING AT THATTASSERIL HOUSE, KIDANGAMPARAMBU WARD,
NEAR NEW PUMP HOUSE, KAPPUMUKKU, THATHAMPALLY.P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA., PIN - 688013
BY ADVS.
RAJESH VIJAYAN
SIKHA S.NAIR
RESPONDENT/ RESPONDENT :
1 MEENU.V.A.
AGED 34 YEARS, W/O.SATHEESAN,
RESIDING AT KASHAMPULIKKALCHIRA,
THONDANKULANGARA WARD, AVALUKUNNU.P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688 006
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682 031
SREEJA V., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 4337 OF 2024
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
---------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.No.4337 of 2024
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2024
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused in S.T.No.60 of 2022 on the files of the
Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-IV, Alappuzha. She was convicted
for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881 (for short, 'N.I.Act'). As per Annexure-I judgment in S.T.No.60 of
2022, she was directed to pay a compensation of Rs.3,66,395/-. In the
appeal filed as Crl.A.No.55 of 2024, the learned Sessions Judge had by
the impugned order dated 06.03.2024 suspended the sentence and also
directed 20% of the fine amount to be deposited under Section 148 of the
N.I. Act. Petitioner is aggrieved by the direction to deposit the aforesaid
amount.
2. I have heard Adv.Rajesh Vijayan, the learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Smt.Sreeja V., the learned Public Prosecutor.
3. Considering the nature of the impugned order, I am of the view
that notice to the first respondent can be dispensed with.
4. In the decision in Sreenivasan P. v. Babu Raj [2024 KHC
Online 270], the Division Bench of this Court after considering the
decision in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P.State Industrial Development
Corporation Ltd. [(2023) 10 SCC 446] held that reasons ought to be
CRL.MC NO. 4337 OF 2024
mentioned for exercising the discretion to impose the condition directing
deposit of a percentage of the compensation amount. In Sreenivasan's
case (supra), the Division Bench of this Court held as follows :-
(a) Under Section 148 of the N.I.Act, the Appellate Court has a
discretion to either order the appellant to deposit a portion of the fine
or compensation awarded by the trial court or to waive such deposit.
In either event, since it would be exercising a statutory discretion, the
Appellate Court would be legally obliged to furnish reasons for its
decision so as to unambiguously indicate that its discretion was
exercised keeping in mind the object of the statutory provision.
(b) If the Appellate Court, pursuant to the exercise of its
discretion, finds that the appellant is required to deposit a portion of
the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court pending disposal
of the appeal, then the amount directed to be deposited cannot be less
than an amount equivalent to 20% of the fine or compensation
awarded by the trial court.
(c) If the Appellate Court chooses to direct the appellant to
deposit any sum which is more than 20% of the fine or compensation
awarded by the trial court, then it would be obliged to give further
reasons for directing the deposit of such amounts as are in excess of
the minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial
court.
5. It is evident, on a reading of Annexure-2 impugned order that
the condition to deposit 20% of the fine amount was imposed by the
Sessions Court without indicating any reason. Hence the impugned order
to that extent is liable to be set aside and a fresh consideration be
directed.
Accordingly, the order dated 06.03.2024 in Crl.M.P.No.965 of 2024
CRL.MC NO. 4337 OF 2024
in Crl.A.No.55 of 2024 on the files of the Sessions Court, Aappuzha to the
extent it directs deposit of 20% of the fine amount is set aside. The
learned Sessions Judge shall reconsider the matter regarding deposit
under Section 148 of the N.I. Act afresh, within three weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order, in accordance with law.
The Registry of this Court shall intimate this order to the learned
Sessions Judge for compliance.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, JUDGE
RKM
CRL.MC NO. 4337 OF 2024
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
31.01.2024 IN S.T.NO. 60/2022 PASSED BY
THE HONOURABLE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-IV, ALAPPUZHA.
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.03.2024
IN CRL.M.P.NO. 965 OF 2024 IN CRL. APPEAL
NO. 55 OF 2024 PASSED BY THE SESSIONS
JUDGE, ALAPPUZHA.
