IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl.MC.No. 4039 of 2009()
1. SHAJI.C., THARAVATTU VEEDU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.C.RAJENDRAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :14/12/2009
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J.
------------------------------------------
Crl.M.C.NO.4039 OF 2009
------------------------------------------
Dated 14th December 2009
O R D E R
Petitioner was convicted and
sentenced for the offence under Section 138
of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Crl.A.383/2009 was filed challenging the
conviction and sentence. Crl.M.P.3185/2009
was filed to suspend the sentence. By
Annexure-A1 order learned Sessions Judge
directed the petitioner to deposit half of
the cheque amount within one month for
suspending the sentence. This petition is
filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal
Procedure to quash said condition
contending that learned Sessions Judge
should not have directed the petitioner to
deposit fifty percentage of the amount for
Crmc 4039/09
2
suspending the sentence.
2. Learned counsel appearing for
petitioner relying on the decision of the
Supreme court in Stanny Felix Pinto v.
Jangid Builders Pvt. Ltd and another (AIR
2001 SC 659) argued that when fine amount
was Rs.20,00,000/- their Lordships directed
to deposit only Rs.4,00,000/- which would be
only 1/5th of the amount and when the cheque
is for Rs.1,50,000/- direction to deposit 50%
of the amount is harsh. Relying on the
decision of Andhra Pradesh High Court in AMI
Sanag Micromation v. State of A.P (2001 (1)
KLJ 409) learned counsel argued that
condition to deposit Rs.25,000/- itself was
found to be unreasonable.
3. Learned counsel submitted that if
petitioner is directed to deposit huge
Crmc 4039/09
3
amount, he cannot avail the benefit of
suspension of the sentence. I find no reason
whatsoever, to interfere with the order
passed by the learned Sessions Judge.
Learned Sessions Judge was justified in
directing to deposit a portion of the amount
covered by the cheque, for suspending the
sentence. Direction to deposit 50% of the
cheque amount is the discretion of the
appellate court. Supreme court has not held
that only 1/5th of the amount covered by the
cheque could be directed to be deposited. On
the other hand, it is stated that if the
amount to be deposited is huge, such
portion shall not be directed to be
deposited. Even Rs.4,00,000/- was found to be
not a huge amount, by the Apex court. In such
circumstances, if the petitioner wants to
Crmc 4039/09
4
suspend the sentence, portion of the amount
as directed by the learned Sessions Judge is
to be deposited. If the case of the
petitioner is that he is not in a position
to deposit the amount, because of his
financial condition, he is at liberty to
approach the learned Sessions Judge to
dispose the appeal at the earliest without
suspending the sentence. As the period to
deposit the amount fixed by the learned
Sessions Judge is over, petitioner is
granted three weeks time from today to
deposit the amount.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE.
uj.