Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, M/s Kesuram Khanchand and its proprietor Chandrabhan Kewalramani, were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, for dishonour of a cheque of Rs. 10,00,000/- issued to the respondent Suresh Chanchalani. The trial court sentenced them to simple imprisonment and directed payment of compensation of Rs. 17,50,000/-. The petitioners appealed, and the appellate court suspended the sentence subject to deposit of 20% of the compensation amount (Rs. 3,50,000/-) within 15 days. The petitioners challenged only this condition before the Bombay High Court under Article 226, arguing that they had already deposited Rs. 1,75,000/- (10% of the cheque amount) before the trial court and that the additional deposit was onerous. The High Court noted that the appellate court had not considered the petitioners' financial hardship and the fact that they had already deposited a substantial amount. The court held that while Section 148 of the NI Act permits the appellate court to impose a condition of deposit up to 20% of the compensation amount, the discretion must be exercised judiciously. Considering the petitioners' circumstances, the High Court modified the condition, reducing the deposit to 10% of the compensation amount (Rs. 1,75,000/-) to be deposited within four weeks. The petition was partly allowed, and the appellate court's order was modified accordingly.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Negotiable Instruments Act - Suspension of Sentence - Condition of Deposit - Section 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - The appellate court has discretion to impose a condition of deposit up to 20% of the compensation amount while suspending sentence under Section 148 of the NI Act. However, the court must consider the facts and circumstances of each case. In the present case, the petitioners had already deposited Rs. 1,75,000/- (10% of the cheque amount) before the trial court, and the appellate court imposed an additional condition of depositing 20% of the compensation amount (Rs. 3,50,000/-). The High Court held that the condition was onerous and reduced it to 10% of the compensation amount, i.e., Rs. 1,75,000/-, to be deposited within four weeks, considering the petitioners' financial hardship and the fact that they had already deposited 10% of the cheque amount. (Paras 2-6) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Interference with Appellate Orders - Article 226 of Constitution of India - The High Court, in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226, can interfere with an order passed by the appellate court if the condition imposed is arbitrary, excessive, or disproportionate. The court must ensure that the condition is not oppressive and is reasonable in the facts of the case. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the condition imposed by the appellate court directing deposit of 20% of the compensation amount for suspension of sentence under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is excessive and warrants interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The petition is partly allowed. The condition imposed by the appellate court is modified. The petitioners shall deposit 10% of the compensation amount, i.e., Rs. 1,75,000/-, within four weeks from the date of the order, instead of the earlier condition of 20% (Rs. 3,50,000/-). The appellate court's order is modified accordingly.
Law Points
- Section 148 of Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- discretion of appellate court
- condition of deposit
- suspension of sentence
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
