Punjab-Haryana High Court
Brij Pal Rathi vs State Of Haryana And Another on 20 September, 2024
Author: Karamjit Singh
Bench: Karamjit Singh
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:124801
CRM-M-46926-2024 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-46926-2024
Date of decision: 20.09.2024
Mr. Brijpal Rathi ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
Present: Mr. Amit Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. A.K. Sehrawat, DAG, Haryana.
****
KARAMJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition under Section 528 of BNSS 2023 has been
filed by the petitioner/accused seeking setting aside of order dated
20.10.2023 Annexure P-4 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions
Judge, Faridabad in CRA-415-2023 titled Payin Utilities and Services Vs.
Damodar Dass Aggarwal vide which the sentence of petitioner under
Section 138 NI Act has been suspended subject to condition to deposit 20%
of the cheque amount in the Court within period of 60 days.
2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2
filed criminal complaint under Section 138 of NI Act against the petitioner
wherein on conclusion of trial, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced
to simple imprisonment for a period of 5 months and to pay compensation
to the tune of Rs.5,25,000/- vide judgment and order dated 18/21.09.2023.
passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad. Being
aggrieved, petitioner has preferred an appeal against the said judgment and
order and the Appellate Court vide order (Annexure P-4) has entertained the
appeal and also disposed of application seeking suspension of sentence with
direction to the petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount, within 60
days.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:124801
CRM-M-46926-2024 [2]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the
learned lower Appellate Court failed to appreciate the facts in the right
perspective and imposed the condition to deposit 20% of the cheque amount
in a mechanical manner, without assigning any reasons and such a condition
is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the law as laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.2741 of 2023 (@ SLP(Crl.) Nos.
4927 of 2023 Jamboo Bhandari vs. M.P. State Industrial Development
Corporation Ltd. and others, decided on 04.09.2023, wherein it was
observed as follows:-
"6. What is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be
made of Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Hence, normally, 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 Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the
Cr.P.C. of an petitioner who has been convicted for offence under Section
138 of the N.I. 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 4 conclusion must be recorded."
4. The counsel for the petitioner further submits that the Hon'ble
Supreme Court reiterated its earlier view in its recent decision in Rakesh
Ranjan Srivastava Vs. The State of Jharkhand and Another 2024 (2) RCR
(Criminal) 279.
4. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner and gone through the
impugned order and the case law referred by counsel for the petitioner and
is of the view that the impugned order Annexure P-4 to the extent whereby
petitioner is directed to deposit 20% of the cheque amount is not passed by
the Appellate Court in accordance with the afore-stated settled position of
law. That deposit of certain amount under Section 148 NI Act is not an
absolute rule. No reason has been assigned by the Appellate Court while
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:124801
CRM-M-46926-2024 [3]
passing the impugned order as to why, the petitioner is directed to deposit
20% of the cheque amount.
5. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order dated
20.10.2023 Annexure P-4 to the extent whereby the condition of depositing
of 20% of cheque amount has been imposed for the purpose of suspension
of sentence and all the subsequent proceedings Annexure P-5 based on
order Annexure P-4 are hereby set aside to that extent only. The Appellate
Court is directed to re-consider the matter in issue after giving opportunity
of hearing to the petitioner and then to pass appropriate order in accordance
with the law laid down in Jamboo Bhandari's case (supra) and Rakesh
Ranjan Srivastava's (supra) and till then not to take any coercive action
against the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to appear before the
Appellate Court on the next date fixed in the appeal.
6. Keeping in view the nature of order being passed, no notice is
required to be issued to the respondents. However, if they feel dis-satisfied
with this order, they may move an application to recall the same.
20.09.2024 (KARAMJIT SINGH)
Yogesh JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
3 of 3
