[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kamlesh Devi vs Hdfc Bank Ltd. And Anr on 10 December, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
209 CRR-1670-2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 10.12.2025.
Kamlesh Devi ...Petitioner.
Versus
HDFC Bank and another ...Respondents.
***
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR
.......
Present: Mr. P.S. Jammu, Advocate and
Mr. R.P.S. Jammu, Advocate and
Mr. Dhruv Bishnoi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Sidhi Bansal, Advocate for
Mr. Amit Rishi, Advocate for respondent No.1-Bank.
Mr. R.K. Singla, Addl. A.G., Haryana.
***
SUKHVINDER KAUR, J.
The present petition has been filed for setting aside the
impugned order dated 15.02.2023 passed by the Court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, in an appeal No.CRA-80-2023, arising out of
judgment of conviction dated 12.01.2023 and order of sentence dated
16.01.2023 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Fatehabad in
Complaint No.NACT-1047 of 2018 under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instrument Act, to the extent, whereby, the sentence of the petitioner was
suspended conditionally by imposing a condition to deposit 20% of the
compensation amount awarded by the trial Court within 60 days.
2. The present complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter to be referred as N.I. Act) was filed by
the complainant alleging that the accused in discharge of his legal liability
1 of 4
CRR-1670-2023 (O&M) -2-
towards the complainant, issued a cheque bearing No.000042 dated
01.08.2018, amounting to Rs.10,70,000/-, drawn on HDFC Bank, Branch
Ding Mandi. On presentation, the same were dishonoured and returned
with the remarks 'insufficient funds' vide memo dated 01.08.2018.
3. Vide judgment of conviction dated 12.01.2023 and order of
sentence dated 16.01.2023 passed by learned trial Court, the petitioner was
convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of
one year and to pay compensation of Rs.18,00,000/- for commission of
offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act within
a period of two months from passing of the said order. Thereafter, the
petitioner preferred an appeal against the said judgment of conviction and
order of sentence before the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehabad. The learned
Appellate Court vide order dated 15.02.2023 suspended the sentence of the
petitioner subject to depositing 20% of the compensation amount within a
period of 60 days.
4. 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
and such a condition is illegal, arbitrary and in violation of the law as laid
down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs. M.P. State
Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. and others, 2023(4) RCR
(Criminal) 296, wherein it was held that-
"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,
2 of 4
CRR-1670-2023 (O&M) -3-
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 a 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."
5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and after
perusing the judgment passed in Jamboo Bhandari (supra), the Appellate
Court was required to consider whether the present case falls in the
exception or not.
6. In the present case, while imposing condition of depositing
20% of the compensation amount, the learned Appellate Court has not
afforded any opportunity to petitioner to make submissions regarding the
exceptional circumstances warranting requirement of waiver of depositing
20% of the compensation amount and imposed the said condition without
any such opportunity.
7. Therefore, the impugned order dated 15.02.2023, whereby, the
condition of depositing 20% of the compensation amount has been imposed
for granting suspension of sentence upon the petitioner is hereby set aside.
The learned lower Appellate Court is directed to re-examine the case after
granting an opportunity to the petitioner to make submissions regarding the
exceptional circumstances and decide whether it is an appropriate case that
warrants waiver of the requirement of depositing 20% of the compensation
amount awarded by learned trial Court.
3 of 4
CRR-1670-2023 (O&M) -4-
8. The directions given in the order dated 15.02.2023, by learned
Appellate Court to the extent of depositing 20% of compensation, are set
aside and it is also clarified that the order of suspension of sentence would
not be disturbed in any manner and same would not be subject to the
observations, which are yet to be made by the Appellate Court while dealing
with the provisions of Section 148 of the Act.
9. The matter is remanded back to the learned lower Appellate
Court with a direction to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law in
the light of judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamboo
Bhandari's case (supra).
10. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
11. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s)
disposed of.
(SUKHVINDER KAUR)
JUDGE
10.12.2025
Komal
Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/ No
Whether reportable? : Yes/ No
4 of 4
