Gouri Prasad Das @ vs State Of Orissa .... Opposite Parties
2026 Latest Caselaw 3046 Ori

Citation : 2026 Latest Caselaw 3046 Ori
Judgement Date : 31 March, 2026

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Orissa High Court

Gouri Prasad Das @ vs State Of Orissa .... Opposite Parties on 31 March, 2026

Author: V. Narasingh

Bench: V. Narasingh

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                             CRLREV No.94 of 2026

         (In the matter of an application under Section 438 of
         BNSS read with Section 442 of BNSS)
                                 ------------------

Gouri Prasad Das @ .... Petitioner Gouri Das

-versus-

1. State of Orissa .... Opposite Parties

2. Udaya Chandrika

For Petitioner : Mr. A. Ray, Advocate

For Opposite Parties : Mr. S. Panigrahi, ASC Mr. A. Mishra, Advocate

CORAM:

JUSTICE V. NARASINGH

DATE OF FINAL HEARING : 30.03.2026

DATE OF JUDGMENT : 31.03.2026

V. Narasingh, J. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and

learned counsel for the Opposite Parties.

1. Assailing the order dated 02.12.2025 passed by

the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jajpur Road in

Criminal Appeal No.62 of 2025 arising out of 1C.C.

Case No.71 of 2019 (Trl. No.75 of 2025) directing the

Petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount

in terms of Section 148(1)1 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'N.I.

Act'), this criminal revision has been preferred.

2. It is apt to note that the Petitioner-accused was

found guilty by the judgment dated 01.11.2025 by the

learned Civil Judge-cum-JMFC, Jajpur Road in 1C.C.

Case No.71 of 2019 (Trl. No.75 of 2025), instituted by

the Opposite Party as the complainant.

3. It is submitted with vehemence by Mr. Ray,

learned counsel relying on the judgment of the Apex

Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari vrs. Madhya

Pradesh State Industrial Development

Corporation Limited and Ors.2, that in the factual

matrix of the case at hand, the learned Appellate

148. Power of Appellate Court to order payment pending appeal against conviction.-- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), in an appeal by the drawer against conviction under Section 138, the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of twenty per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court:

Provided that the amount payable under this sub-section shall be in addition to any interim compensation paid by the appellant under Section 143-A.

Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. SIDC Ltd., (2023) 10 SCC 446

Court failed to appreciate that the said stipulation is

not inflexible.

He also vehemently urged that the documents

placed before the learned Trial Court were not taken

into account and the appreciation of evidence and

materials on record is ex facie perverse, which forms

the subject matter of the appeal. The direction as per

the impugned order to make a deposit of 20%,

considering his present financial condition, would

deprive him from prosecuting the appeal, in an

effective manner.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant-Opposite

Party opposes such submission, and in doing so, he

also relies on the very judgment which has been cited

by the Petitioner-accused.

5. One of the grounds which has been urged is

that the cheque in question was inter alia issued as a

security.

To fortify his submissions, learned counsel for

the Petitioner also referred to the documents which

were placed on record by way of memo, which read as

under:-

"1. Copy of the cheque issued by the Opp. Party No. 2 bearing no. 089634 of State Bank of India, Jajpur Road Branch.

2. Copy of the letter for indemnification dated 21.12.2009 issued by the Opp. Party No. 2 to the Petitioner.

3. Copy of the deposition of the Petitioner.

4. Copy of the Evidence Affidavit of the Opp. Party No. 2 along with the cross examination."

And, referring to the same, it is submitted that

in recording an order of conviction the learned Trial

Court failed to appreciate the evidence and materials

on record in its proper perspective.

6. This Court carefully perused the materials on

the basis of which the judgment of conviction has

been recorded, as well as the materials, which have

been produced by way of memo, which include the

evidence as adduced before the learned Trial Court of

the Petitioner as well as the Opposite Party No.2.

7. Keeping in view that the learned Trial Court is

in seisin of the matter, this Court refrains from making

any observation regarding the stand taken by the

Petitioner-accused referred to hereinabove, since that

will prejudice the learned Appellate Court.

8. Paragraph Nos.6 and 7 of the Judgment in

Jamboo Bhandari (Supra)2 which are germane for

the decision in this revision, are extracted hereunder:-

"6. What is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 NI Act. Hence, normally, the appellate court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the appellate court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can be made for the reasons specifically recorded.

7. Therefore, when the appellate court considers the prayer under Section 389 CrPC of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 NI Act, it is always open for the appellate court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing

the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the appellate court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusion must be recorded."

(Emphasized)

9. On considering the rival submissions in the

light of the evidence and materials on record, this

Court is not persuaded to hold that the Petitioner has

been able to make out an "exceptional case" so as to

merit complete waiver of the stipulation of "the

minimum of 20% of fine or compensation awarded by

the learned Trial Court."

It is apt to note that this Court initially, by

order dated 29.01.2026 in I.A. No. 143 of 2026,

extended the stipulation of deposit of 20% of the

compensation. The same was further extended by