Kerala High Court
Prakasan M vs State Of Kerala on 24 October, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2024:KER:79146
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 2ND KARTHIKA, 1946
CRL.MC NO. 8857 OF 2024
CRIME NO.0/0 OF ,
IN CRA NO.154 OF 2024 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS &
MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KASARAGOD
ST NO.132 OF 2022 OF CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE ,KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
PRAKASAN M, AGED 58 YEARS
S/O.KUNHIRAMAN NAIR, RESIDING AT MGPXX/188E,
NEW HOUSE, PERIYADUKKA, SHIRIBAGILU POST,
KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671124
BY ADVS.
T.MADHU
C.R.SARADAMANI
RENJISH S. MENON
AISWARYA JAYAPAL
ALEENA JOSE
RESPONDENT/STATE & RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682031
2 BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 63 YEARS
RETIRED SUB TREASURY OFFICER,
S/O.LATE KANNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT THAIVALAPPIL,
ANINHA, KOLIYADUKKAM, PERUMBALA POST,
KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN - 671317
CRL.MC NO. 8857 OF 2024 2
2024:KER:79146
BY ADV.
SRI. NOUSHAD K. A. (PP)
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 8857 OF 2024 3
2024:KER:79146
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
......................................................
Crl.M.C. No.8857 of 2024
...................................................
Dated this the 24th day of February, 2024
ORDER
Petitioner is the accused in S.T.C No.132/2022 on the files
of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Kasargod. He was convicted
for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881 (for short, 'N.I.Act'). As per Annexure A1 judgment, he
was directed to pay a compensation of Rs.7,00,000/-. In the appeal
filed as Crl.A.No.154/2024, the learned Sessions Judge had by the
impugned order dated 03.09.2024 suspended the sentence and
also directed 15% 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 Sri.T.Madhu, the learned counsel appearing
for the petitioner as well as Sri. Noushad K.A., the learned Public
Prosecutor.
3. Considering the nature of the impugned order, I am of
the view that notice to the second respondent can be dispensed
with.
2024:KER:79146
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 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.
2024:KER:79146
5. It is evident, on a reading of Annexure-A4 impugned
order that the condition to deposit 15% 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.
6. Accordingly, the order dated 03.09.2024 in
Crl.M.P.No.4592/2024 in Crl.Appeal No.154/2024 on the files of the
Session's Court, Kasargod to the extent it directs deposit of 15% 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 four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order, in accordance with law.
7. The Registry of this Court shall intimate this order to the
learned Sessions Judge for compliance.
The Crl.M.C. is allowed as above.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJ
2024:KER:79146
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
6/8/2024 IN STC.NO.132/2022 ON THE FILES
OF THE LEARNED CHIEF JUDICIAL
MAGISTRATE'S COURT, KASARAGOD
Annexure A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM
DATED 31/8/2024 IN CR.A.NO.154/2024 ON
THE FILES OF THE SESSION'S COURT
KASARAGOD
Annexure A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN
CRL.M.P.NO.4592/2024 IN CRL.A.NO.154/2024
ON THE FILES OF THE SESSION'S COURT,
KASARAGOD
Annexure A4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3/9/2024
IN CRL.M.P.NO.4592/2024 IN
CRL.A.NO.154/2024 ON THE FILES OF THE
SESSION'S COURT, KASARAGOD.
Annexure A5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY
THE COMPLAINANT IN LIEU OF CHIEF
EXAMINATION IN STC NO.132/2022 ON THE
FILES OF THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE'S
COURT, KASARAGOD ALONG WITH HIS CROSS
EXAMINATION.
