[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
George Jacob vs State Of Kerala on 16 January, 2026
Author: C.S.Dias
Bench: C.S.Dias
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026 1 2026:KER:3856
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 26TH POUSHA, 1947
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 25.11.2025 IN Crl.A NO.172
OF 2025 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT/RENT CONTROL APPELLATE
AUTHORITY, THODUPUZHA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/APPELLNT:
GEORGE JACOB
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O JACOB, VALIYAPADINARETHIL HOUSE, KATTAPPANA SOUTH
P.O., KATTAPPANA VILLAGE, IDUKKI., PIN - 685515
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR
SRI.S.SHYAM KUMAR
SHRI.SACHIN GEORGE ARAMBAN
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT :
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 BIJU P. SEBASTAIN
AGED 33 YEARS
S/O SEBASTIAN, PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VALIYATHOVALA P.O.,
PAMPADUMPARA VILLAGE, IDUKKI., PIN - 685514
PP STI M P PRASANTH
THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026 2 2026:KER:3856
C.S.DIAS,J
--------------------------------------------
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026
---------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of January, 2026
ORDER
Aggrieved by Annexure A1 judgment passed by the
Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Kattappana, in
C.C.No.863/2019, convicting and sentencing the petitioner for
an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 1881, ('NI Act', in short), the petitioner has preferred Crl.
Appeal No.172/2025 on the file of the Court of Session,
Thodupuzha (Appellate Court). Along with the appeal, the
petitioner had filed an application to suspend the execution of
the substantive sentence and fine imposed on him. However,
by the impugned Annexure A2 order, the Appellate Court
suspended the sentence, subject to the condition that the
petitioner deposits 20% of the fine/compensation amount
within sixty days, failing which the order suspension sentence
will stand vacated. In fact, the petitioner had specifically
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026 3 2026:KER:3856
pleaded in the application that he is a daily labourer and has
no means to deposit the compensation amount. Although, the
petitioner had made out exceptional circumstances, the
Appellate Court has passed the impugned order, which is
untenable. Hence, the Crl.M.C.
2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Public Prosecutor. In view of the limited relief
that I proposed to pass and the fact that the matter pertains to
suspension of the sentence, I dispense with notice to the 2 nd
respondent .
3. The petitioner's specific case in the application is
that, he is a daily labourer having no financial means.
Therefore, he may be exempted from depositing any
fine/compensation amount as envisaged under Section 148 of
the NI Act.
4. In Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col. S.S. Deswal
and others v. Virendar 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
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026 4 2026:KER:3856
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 Development
Corporation Ltd (2023 (6) KHC 80) 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.
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026 5 2026:KER:3856
6. In the instant case, although the petitioner has
specifically mentioned the exceptional circumstances to waive
the statutory deposit of 20% as envisaged under Section 148
of the NI Act, the Appellate Court has directed the petitioner
to deposit 20% of the fine amount without assigning any
reason.
7. Both in Jamboo Bhandari & Surinder Singh
Deswal 's cases (supra), the Honourable Supreme Court has
categorically held that discretion of the Court is to be
exercised in cases where exceptional circumstances are made
out.
8. On a consideration of the facts and materials on
record, especially the reasons stated in the application, I am of
the definite view that the petitioner has made out exceptional
circumstances to waive the statutory deposit of the fine
amount for the suspension of sentence.
Accordingly, I allow the Criminal Miscellaneous Case,
by setting aside the condition in Annexure A2 order to the
extent it directs the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine
amount and I suspend the execution of the sentence imposed
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026 6 2026:KER:3856
on the petitioner, as per Annexure A1 judgment, subject to the
condition that the petitioner executes a bond for Rs.6,19,000/-
with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of
the Trial Court within ten days from today.
Sd/-
C.S.DIAS, JUDGE
SCB.16.01.26.
CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026 7 2026:KER:3856
APPENDIX OF CRL.MC NO. 297 OF 2026
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure AI A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.10.2025
IN C.C.NO.863 OF 2019 OF JUDICIAL I CLASS
MAGISTRATE COURT-I, KATTAPPANA
Annexure AII A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.M.P.NO.6005
OF 2025 IN CRL.A.NO.172 OF 2025 DATED
25.11.2025 OF THE LEARNED SESSION'S COURT,
THODUPUZHA
