Punjab-Haryana High Court
Chottu Ram vs Pawan Kumar Walia And Another on 30 September, 2022
CRM-M-45963-2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
138(1)
CRM-M No.45963 of 2022
Date of Decision: 30.09.2022
Chottu Ram ...Petitioner
Versus
Pawan Kumar Walia ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr. G.S. Bhullar, Advocate for the petitioner.
****
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
Criminal NACT/522/2018
Complaint Date of Decision: 10.06.2022
Order on quantum of Sentence on: 14.06.2022
Criminal No.58 of 2022
Appeal CNR No.HRPK010023602022
Date of order: 07.07.2022
Aggrieved by the direction to deposit 25% of compensation as a condition
precedent while suspending the sentence in an appeal against the conviction, the
convict has come up before this Court against the condition.
2. Vide impugned judgment, the petitioners were convicted for commission of
offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short N.I. Act).
Feeling aggrieved, they had challenged the same before the Sessions Court. While
suspending the sentence, vide order dated 07.07.2022, learned Sessions Judge,
Panchkula directed the appellant in the aforesaid terms.
3. Section 148 of the N.I. Act was amended and w.e.f. 01.09.2018 Section 148 was
inserted. As per Section 148 of N.I. Act, it is within the powers of the appellate Court to
order payment pending appeal against conviction. As per Section 148(1), the Appellate
Court can do the same on its own without there being any application filed by the
complainant.
4. In Surinder Singh Deswal v. Virender Gandhi, 2019 LawSuit(SC) 1245, Hon'ble
Supreme Court holds,
[8] It is the case on behalf of the appellants that as the criminal
complaints against the appellants under Section 138 of the N.I.
Act were lodged/filed before the amendment Act No. 20/2018
by which Section 148 of the N.I. Act came to be amended and
therefore amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act shall not be
1 of 2
CRM-M-45963-2022
made applicable. However, it is required to be noted that at the
time when the appeals against the conviction of the appellants
for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act were
preferred, Amendment Act No. 20/2018 amending Section 148
of the N.I. Act came into force w.e.f. 1.9.2018. Even, at the time
when the appellants submitted application/s under Section 389
of the Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence pending appeals
challenging the conviction and sentence, amended Section 148
of the N.I. Act came into force and was brought on statute w.e.f.
1.9.2018. Therefore, considering the object and purpose of
amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act and while suspending
the sentence in exercise of powers under Section 389 of the
Cr.P.C., when the first appellate court directed the appellants to
deposit 25% of the amount of fine/compensation as imposed
by the learned trial Court, the same can be said to be absolutely
in consonance with the Statement of Objects and Reasons of
amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act.
5. Without going into the petition's merits, the interest of justice would suffice if
the appeal pending before the appellate Court is taken on the priority. This Court
requests the learned Appellate Court to decide these appeals on top priority preferably
on or before Nov 30, 2022.
6. It is clarified that the Appellate Court shall decide the appeal notwithstanding
the non-deposit of the instruments described above, and no coercive steps are taken
against the convict until the time mentioned above period. The convict/appellant is
directed not to seek any adjournment; however, if the appellant seeks any
adjournment, then this order shall be recalled automatically under section 362 read
with 482 Cr.P.C., without any further reference to this court. If the counsel for the
appellant is absent or seeks adjournment, then it shall also be open for the Appellate
Court to appoint a legal aid counsel for the convict and to hear the appeal on merits.
The complainant is requested not to seek any adjournment. Parties to inform the
concerned court.
The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. All pending applications, if
any, stand disposed of.
(ANOOP CHITKARA)
JUDGE
30.09.2022
Jyoti-II
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No.
2 of 2
