Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Satyanarayan vs State Of Rajasthan (2024:Rj-Jd:26060) on 28 June, 2024
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2024:RJ-JD:26060]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 3957/2024
Satyanarayan S/o Shri Debi Lal, Aged About 51 Years, R/o
Keshuvilas (Udaipuriya), Tehsil And Dist. Bijoliya, Dist. Bhilwara.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Goverdhan Vaishnav S/o Gokul Das Vaishnav, R/o Triveni
Choraha, Police Station Bigod, Dist. Bhilwara.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bhushan Singh Charan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.R. Choudhary, PP
Mr. D.S. Udawat
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA (VACATION JUDGE)
Order
28/06/2024
1. The present criminal miscellaneous petition has been
preferred against the order dated 21.02.2024 passed by Learned
Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Bhilawara Camp Mandalgarh in
Criminal Appeal No.39/2024 whereby the learned Appellate Court
while suspending the sentence awarded to the accused, directed
him to file an undertaking to deposit 20% of the fine amount
within a period of 60 days.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner while relying upon the
Hon'ble Apex Court judgment in Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P.
State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. & Ors.;
Criminal Appeal No.2741/2023 (decided on 04.09.2023),
submitted that although the Hon'ble Apex Court has decided that
deposition of 20% of the fine amount is not a mandate, he has
preferred the present petition only for extension of the time for
[2024:RJ-JD:26060] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-3957/2024]
deposition of the amount as directed by the appellate Court. He
submits that sufficient time be granted to the accused petitioner
for deposition of the said amount.
3. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied upon the
order of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in S.B.
Criminal Misc(Pet.) No.1327/2023; Mahesh Mutha Vs. State
of Rajasthan & Anr. (decided on 21.03.2023) and interim order
dated 24.01.2024 passed in S.B Criminal Misc(Pet.)
No.507/2024; Bhagwan Das Vs. Indra Devi.
4. Learned P.P. and learned counsel for the respondent no.2
opposed the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.
6. A perusal of the record makes it clear that vide order dated
21.02.2024 while suspending the sentence of the accused, the
appellate Court granted 60 days time to him to deposit 20% of the
fine amount. However, the same was not deposited within the said
time and an application for extension of the said period was
preferred by the accused. Vide order dated 24.04.2024, the said
application as preferred by the accused was allowed and further
time of 20 days was granted.
Evidently, 20 days' time granted vide order dated
24.04.2024 expired way back. It is also an admitted fact that the
amount has not been deposited till date. As held by the Hon'ble
Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari's case (supra), the condition to
deposit 20% of the fine/compensation is a Rule and it is only in
the exceptional circumstances that the Court would be justified in
not imposing the said condition. However, if the Court finds the
[2024:RJ-JD:26060] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-3957/2024]
case to be an exceptional one, it is under an obligation to record
the reasons for the same.
7. What is clear on record in the present matter is that vide
order dated 21.02.2024, 60 days' time was granted to the accused
and vide order dated 24.04.2024, further time of 20 days was
granted. Till date, the amount has not been deposited and no
exceptional circumstances have been shown as to why the
condition as imposed by the appellate Court ought not to have
been imposed. This Court does not find any plausible ground to
extend the time for deposition of the amount, any further.
8. So far as the orders of the co-ordinate Benches as relied
upon by the counsel for the petitioner are concerned, the same
would be of no help to the petitioner as neither of them lays down
that time is mandatorily to be extended whenever an application
for the same is made by the accused. Vide both the orders, the
condition to deposit 20% of the fine amount has been modified to
deposit 20% of the cheque amount. No such prayer has been
made by counsel for the petitioner before this Court.
9. In view of the above analysis, the present criminal
miscellaneous petition is dismissed.
10. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),VJ
53-SPhophaliya/Devanshi/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
