[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Sanush K Mathew vs State Of Kerala on 14 January, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
1
2026:KER:3512
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 24TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 3920 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN MP NO.1411 OF 2024 OF
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT(ADHOC) III, THRISSUR
PETITIONER/S:
SANUSH K MATHEW
AGED 43 YEARS
S/O MATHEW AGED 43 YEARS KUNNEL HOUSE AASARIKAD P
O,VELLACHAL P O,THRISSUR DT., PIN - 680305
BY ADVS.
SHRI.FRANKLIN ARACKAL
KUM.NEETHU SOMAN
SRI.I.J.AUGUSTINE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH
COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 MADHU C K
AGED 50 YEARS
. S/O KUNJUNNI NAIR CHERIYAGATH HOUSE NETTISSERRY
DESOM,OLLUKKARA P O,THRISSUR, PIN - 680658
OTHER PRESENT:
2
2026:KER:3512
SR.PP.SMT.SREEJA V
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 14.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
3
2026:KER:3512
C.S.DIAS, J.
----------------------------------------
Crl. M.C No. 3920 of 2024
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 14th day of January, 2026
ORDER
Aggrieved by the Annexure A1 judgment passed
by the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III,
Thrissur (for short, 'Trial Court'), convicting and
sentencing the petitioner for an offence under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ('N.I.Act', in
short), the petitioner has preferred Crl. Appeal No.
39/2024 before the Court of Session, Thrissur
(Appellate Court). Along with the appeal, the petitioner
also filed an Annexure A3 application to suspend the
execution of the substantive sentence and fine imposed
on him. However, by Annexure A4 order, the Appellate
Court has directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the
2026:KER:3512
compensation amount ordered by the Trial Court
within two months from the date of order. The
petitioner is suffering from epilepsy. The petitioner is
unable to do any employment. The Appellate Court has
failed to consider the exceptional circumstances
involved in the case. Annexure A4 order is
unreasonable and unjustifiable. Hence, the Crl.M.C.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned public prosecutor. Though
the service of notice is completed on the 2nd
respondent, there is no appearance for him.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that, as evident from Annexure A5 medical
certificate, the petitioner is suffering from epilepsy,
and he is under constant treatment. In view of his
disease, the petitioner is unable to do any employment.
Therefore, the petitioner is not in a position to deposit
20% of the compensation amount, which comes to
2026:KER:3512
about Rs.1,03,000 (One Lakh Three Thousand Rupees).
If the substantive sentence is not suspended, the
petitioner would be put to severe substantial prejudice
and hardship. Hence, Annexure A4 order may be being
quashed.
4. In Surinder Singh Deswal' @ Col. S. S.
Deswal vs Virender Gandhi [2019 (11) SCC 341,
the Honourable Supreme Court has categorically held
that the language under Section 148 of the N.I.Act is
'may' and not 'shall'. Therefore, the discretion is vested
with the Appellate Court to decide whether 20% of the
fine/compensation amount is to be deposited or waived
for suspending the sentence imposed on the accused.
The said provision has to be purposefully interpreted in
furtherance of the objects and reasons of the
amendment under Section 148 of the N.I.Act.
5. The above view has been reiterated in
Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State Industrial
2026:KER:3512
Development Corporation Ltd. & Others, [2023
(6) KHC 80 (SC)] by holding that when an accused
applies under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. for suspension
of sentence, he normally applies for grant of relief for
suspension of sentence without condition. Therefore,
when a blanket order is sought by the appellant, the
Appellate Court has to consider whether the case falls
within exceptional grounds. An identical view has been
taken by a Division Bench of this Court in
Sreenivasan P. v. Babu Raj (2024 (2) KHC 621), by
holding that the Appellate Court has a discretion to
either order the appellant to deposit a portion of the
fine/compensation amount awarded by the Trial Court
or to waive such deposit. In either case, the Appellate
Court has to give reasons for exercising such statutory
discretion.
6. In the present case, by Annexure A4 order,
the Appellate Court has directed the petitioner to
2026:KER:3512
deposit 20% of the fine amount. Going by Annexure A5
medical certificate, it is evident that the petitioner is
an epileptic patient. Taking into consideration the said
disease, I am of the definite view that the petitioner
has made out exceptional circumstances to suspend
the execution of the sentence by waiving the statutory
deposit of the compensation amount.
Accordingly, I allow the Criminal Miscellaneous
Case, by setting aside the condition in Annexure A4
order, ordering the petitioner to deposit 20% of the
fine amount imposed by the Trial Court. Nonetheless,
the petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.5,15,000
(Five Lakh Fifteen Thousand), with two solvent sureties
for the like sum, to the satisfaction of the Trial Court
within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order. On the petitioner executing the bond, the
Appellate Court is directed to consider and dispose of
the Crl. Appeal No. 39/2024 in accordance with law
2026:KER:3512
and as expeditiously as possible.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
Srs/14.01.2026
2026:KER:3512
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 3920 OF 2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT IN CC
1977/2015 DATED 27/1/2024 OF HONBLE JFCM
NO.III ,THRISSUR
Annexure A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CRL APPEAL NO. 39/2024
DATED 5/2/2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE
SESSIONS JUDGE,THRISSUR
Annexure A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE CRL MP 1411/2024 IN
CRL APPEAL NO.39/2024 DATED 5/2/2024 ON
THE FILE OF HON'BLE SESSIONS
JUDGE,THRISSUR
Annexure A4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER CRL MP 1411/2024
IN CRL APPEAL NO.39/2024 DATED 8/2/2024
OF HON'BLE SESSIONS JUDGE,THRISSUR
Annexure A5 A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY
DATED 11/2/2022 ISSUED FROM DAYA GENERAL
HOSPITAL LTD & SPECIALTY SURGICAL CENTRE,
Annexure A6 .A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
