Lakshmi vs Basavaraju

H.P. Sandesh, J

This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. praying this Court to reduce the deposit amount from 50% to 20% of the fine amount in the order dated 19.03.2020 passed by the learned V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Devanahalli and pass such other order as this Court deems fit regarding imposition of condition while suspending the sentence.

The factual matrix of the case is that the respondent herein had filed a private complaint under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. invoking the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (‘NI Act’ for short). The learned Magistrate vide judgment dated 05.11.2019 convicted the petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act and directed to pay the fine of Rs.2,50,000/- within three months and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The said order has been challenged in the criminal appeal and the learned Appellate Court while suspending the sentence passed an order directing the appellant/petitioner herein to deposit 50% of the fine amount within 15 days before the Trial Court from the date of the order.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently contend that he has got merits in the appeal and imposition of condition to pay 50% of the fine amount causes prejudice to the interest of the petitioner herein. It is also contended that order to deposit 50% of the fine amount was made on 19.03.2020 and due to Covid-19, the limitation of NI Act was extended from time to time. The learned counsel would contend that the petitioner has been suffering from medical ailments and having severe neck and spinal cord problem. In support of his contentions he has produced the document at Annexure-B and submits that it is very difficult for the petitioner to pay 50% of the fine amount. The learned counsel would contend that this Court while considering the stay application, directed to deposit 20% of the fine amount and accordingly 20% of the fine amount is paid. Hence, requests the Court to reduce the same to 20%.

Inspite of service of notice to the respondent, the respondent did not choose to appear before the Court.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also on perusal of the impugned order, the Appellate Court has exercised its discretion while suspending the sentence. When the appeal is filed and when the grounds are urged before the Appellate Court questioning the order of conviction and sentence, the Appellate Court ought to have exercised its discretion judiciously and hence it requires interference of this Court.

Having taken note of the reasons assigned in the order and also the grounds urged in the petition, it is appropriate to reduce the same from 50% to 25%. The petitioner has already deposited 20% of the fine amount and hence the petitioner is directed to pay the remaining 5% of the amount within four weeks from today.

With this modification, the petition is disposed of.