A bench of Justice Lalit and Justice Saran in the case titled as IKRAM ULLA vs STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. on 08.08.2019 rejected the challenge made by a person accused of cheque bounce whereby he wanted a relief in respect of direction for interim compensation.
Earlier, the accused had moved the High Court challenging the order passed by the appellate court. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant was convicted and sentenced by the trial court in Case No. 17161 of 2017, under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act for the period of one years' imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 53,50,000/-. It is also submitted that applicant preferred criminal appeal before the Sessions Judge concerned, which has been admitted. Applicant prayer for bail has been allowed directing him to deposit Rs. 25 lakhs within a period of fifteen days. It is further submitted that appellate court has exceeded its jurisdiction directing the applicant to deposit Rs. 25 lakhs. Minimum limit for deposit at the stage of appeal is only 20%. It is next submitted that only fifteen days time was provided to deposit the amount whereas amendment made in the Negotiable Instruments Act in the year 2018 itself speaks that sixty days time shall be provided to deposit the said amount. Time so allowed could also be extended for a further period of thirty days. Thus, referring to the order dated 19.01.2019 passed by lower appellate court, it is further submitted that lower appellate court has not taken into consideration the statutory provisions.
High Court held "Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing the parties and going through amendment in the Section 148 Negotiable Instruments Act, the amount directed by the lower appellate court to be deposited by the applicant cannot be said to be against provisions of law. Order dated 19.01.2019 is liable to be modified only to the extent that applicant shall deposit the said amount within a period of sixty days from the date of order i.e. 19.01.2019 instead of fifteen days".
Accused approached the Supreme Court which observed and held "We see no reason to interfere in the matter. However, at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, we extend the time by further period of four weeks within which if the amount so directed by the High Court is deposited, the petitioner shall be entitled to the benefit accruing from the order passed by the High Court".
Read the Order here:
Picture Source :
