Urmila Parida vs Bairagi Penthoi
2021 Latest Caselaw 223 Ori

                       CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.PUJAHARI

                                    CRLREV No.498 of 2020

                           Urmila Parida                  ... Petitioner
                                         - Versus -
                           Bairagi Penthoi                ... Opp. Party

                                            ORDER

02. 06.01.2021 In the wake of the pandemic Covid-19, the case is taken up through V.C.

Heard.

The petitioner, being convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and pay compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- to the opposite party/complainant for commission of the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act vide judgment dated 08.11.2019 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh in 1.C.C. Case No.188 of 2016, had preferred Criminal Appeal No.51 of 2019 before the learned Sessions Judge, Nayagarh where the learned Sessions Judge directed for depositing 20% of the aforesaid amount, i.e., Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of the Registrar, Civil Court, Nayagarh in the shape of Challan as condition precedent for admission of the appeal and as the petitioner failed to deposit the same and no one had moved for extension of time to deposit the amount, the appeal was dismissed for default vide order dated 31.01.2020.

The Apex Court in the case of Dilip S. Dahanukar vrs. Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. and another, reported in

(2007) 6 SCC 528 have held that 'Article 21 of the Constitution read with Section 374 Cr.P.C. confers a right of appeal. Right of appeal from a judgment of conviction affecting the liberty of a person keeping in view the expansive definition of Article 21 as also the international covenants operating in the field, is also a fundamental right. Such a right is an absolute one. Right of appeal, thus, can neither be interfered with or impaired, nor can it be subjected to any condition.' In view of the aforesaid mandate of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dilip S. Dahanukar (supra), the impugned order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the same stands set aside and the learned Sessions Judge, Nayagarh is directed to restore the appeal to file and take up the same for admission, but while directing the suspension of the sentence and also the stay of compensation, the same may be subject to the condition of deposit as envisaged under Section 148 of N.I. Act.

With the aforesaid order, this Criminal Revision stands disposed of.

The parties may utilize the copy of this order as per the High Court's Notice No.4587 dated 25.03.2020.

.......................

S.Pujahari, J.

DA