Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:

1. The order of conditional suspension of sentence is contingent upon the non-compliance of the specified condition. Failure to fulfill the condition, such as not depositing the required amount, has a direct adverse effect on the continuance of the suspension, which can lead to its vacation (!) (!) (!) .

2. The applicability of the amended section related to deposit conditions (Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act) is considered to be prospective, even in cases where the complaint was filed prior to the amendment. The amendment aims to prevent delays caused by appeals and stays, thereby facilitating quicker enforcement of compensation orders (!) .

3. When a suspension of sentence is granted on a condition, non-compliance with that condition provides sufficient grounds for the court to declare the suspension as vacated. This principle applies regardless of whether the order was passed by the trial court or the appellate court, and it is within the jurisdiction of the appellate court to decide on such non-compliance (!) (!) (!) .

4. The courts have consistently held that non-deposit of the specified percentage of the compensation or fine, as directed, results in the automatic vacating of the suspension of sentence. The failure to comply with such conditions is viewed as a serious breach that justifies the vacation of the suspension (!) (!) (!) .

5. The legal provisions and amendments aim to ensure speedy disposal of cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the courts have emphasized that the discretion to impose deposit conditions is generally mandatory when such conditions are prescribed, especially to prevent delays and uphold the integrity of cheque transactions (!) (!) .

6. The courts have dismissed challenges to the conditions imposed for suspension, affirming that the non-compliance with deposit conditions warrants the vacation of the suspension and subsequent surrender or enforcement actions (!) (!) .

7. The judgment clarifies that the non-compliance with suspension conditions, such as failure to deposit the mandated amount within the specified period, is sufficient to vacate the suspension, and the courts are justified in taking such actions to uphold procedural integrity (!) (!) .

8. Overall, the legal stance is that failure to adhere to the conditions for suspension, particularly regarding deposit of the specified amount, results in the automatic vacating of the suspension order, and courts are within their rights to enforce this principle to ensure compliance and justice (!) (!) (!) (!) .

These points collectively emphasize the importance of strict compliance with conditions attached to suspension orders, especially deposit requirements, and affirm that non-compliance leads to the automatic vacation of the suspension of sentence.