Punjab-Haryana High Court
Lalit Garg vs Dinesh Tyagi on 24 September, 2024
Author: Karamjit Singh
Bench: Karamjit Singh
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:126404
CRM-M-47935-2024 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-47935-2024
Date of decision: 24.09.2024
Lalit Garg ...Petitioner
Versus
Dinesh Tyagi ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH
Present: Mr. Munish Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner.
****
KARAMJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under
Section 528 of BNSS 2023 seeking quashing of order dated 20.08.2024
(Annexure P-3) passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge,
Faridabad in CRA-231-2024 titled as Lalit Garg Vs. Dinesh Tyagi whereby
the sentence of the petitioner under Section 138 NI Act has been suspended
subject to condition to deposit 20% amount of the compensation awarded
by the trial Court by way of fixed deposit receipt or bank draft in favour of
respondent/complainant.
2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent filed
criminal complaint under Section 138 of NI Act against the petitioner
wherein on conclusion of trial, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced
to S.I. for a period of 6 months and to pay compensation worth
Rs.32,00,000/- under Section 138 NI Act vide judgment and order dated
16/22.07.2024 by the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridabad.
Being aggrieved, petitioner has preferred appeal against the said judgment
and order and the Appellate Court vide order dated 20.08.2024 has
entertained the appeal and also disposed of application seeking suspension
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:126404
CRM-M-47935-2024 [2]
of sentence with direction to the petitioner to deposit 20% of the amount of
compensation awarded by the learned trial Court on or before 16.10.2024 in
the shape of FDR or bank draft in the name of respondent/complainant,
failing which the order of suspension of sentence shall be deemed to be
vacated.
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 compensation
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."
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:126404
CRM-M-47935-2024 [3]
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 dated 20.08.2024 to the extent
whereby petitioner is directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount
awarded by trial Court is not passed by the Appellate Court in accordance
with the afore-stated settled position of law. While passing the said
direction, the Appellate Court has not referred to the law laid down by
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari's case (supra) and no reason
is given by the said Court while issuing aforesaid direction.
5. For the foregoing reason, the impugned order dated 20.08.2024
to the extent whereby the condition of depositing of 20% of compensation
amount awarded by the trial Court has been imposed for the purpose of
suspension of sentence, is hereby set aside. The Appellate Court is directed
to re-consider the same 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 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 respondent. However, if he feels dis-satisfied with
this order, he may move an application to recall the same.
24.09.2024 (KARAMJIT SINGH)
Yogesh JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
3 of 3
