The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provision of Section 148(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act is mandatory, and the Court cannot use its inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to extend the time beyond that prescribed by the legislature.

JUDGMENT :

(Rakesh Kainthla, J.)

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 06.11.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Poanta Sahib in case No. 299 of 2023, titled Surinder Singh Vs. Dharam Singh, whereby the application for an extension of time for complying with the order dated 28.06.2023 was dismissed. It has been asserted that the petitioner was convicted by the learned Trial Court for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 (in short N.I.Act). He was sentenced to undergo six months of simple imprisonment and directed to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) to the complainant. He filed an appeal and an application for suspension of his sentence under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. The learned Appellate Court suspended the sentence subject to furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and also to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within two months from the date of the order. The petitioner could not comply with the order and sought extension of time, which was granted to him. The petitioner again could not comply with the order and he filed another application for seeking more time, however, this application was dismissed by the learned First Appellate Court. The learned First Appellate court wrongly construed the provisions of the N.I.Act and held that no further time could be granted. It failed to appreciate that petitioner could not comply with the order on the genuine ground. In case the petitioner is sent to jail for non-compliance of the order dated 28.06.2023, he would be unable to arrange the requisite amount. Therefore, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the order passed by the learned Appellate Court Sahib be set aside.

2. I have heard Mr. V.S. Chauhan, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. Rajul Chauhan, learned counsel, for the petitioner and Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General for respondent no.2.

3. Mr. V.S.Chauhan, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments of Solar4Max Com vs. Oxide Power Product Pvt. Ltd. 2021(1) Civil Court Cases 232 and Ravinder Kumar Vs. Salamudeen AIR Online 2020 P&H 144 to submit that the High Court has the power to extend the time under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, he prayed that the present petition be allowed and time be extended.

4. Mr. Jitender Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General supported the order passed by the learned First Appellate Court and submitted that no interference is required with the same.

5. I have given considerable thought to the submissions at Bar and have gone through the records carefully.

6. Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act provides that in an appeal by the drawer against conviction under Section 138, the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of twenty per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the Trial Court. This amount shall be deposited within sixty days from the date of the order, or within such further period not exceeding thirty days as may be directed by the Court on sufficient cause being shown by the appellant.

Xxxxx

8. It is apparent from the bare reading of the Section that the amount has to be deposited within 60 days, which time can be extended by 30 days on showing sufficient cause.

9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held in Suridner Singh Deshwal vs Virender Gandhi & another 2019 (11) SCC 341, that Section 148 of the N.I.Act was introduced to avoid the delaying tactics of the drawers due to easy filing of an appeal and obtaining the stay of the proceedings. This was frustrating the very purpose of enactment of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881; therefore, the Parliament decided to provide that 20% amount shall be deposited by the appellant:-

6.2. While considering the aforesa