BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. Dhandapani, J.
M/s. Hi Tech Foams Madurai Integrated Textile Park, Vadipatti Post, Madurai Rep by Managing Partner X.R. Sahayaraj Baskaran & Others - Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Sri Parameshwari Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Finance Manager, M. Ravi - Respondent
Crl. R.C. (MD) No. 326 of 2024 & Crl. M.P (MD) No. 3726 of 2024
Decided On : 26-03-2024
Negotiable Instruments Act - Criminal Revision Case - Court modifies condition for depositing cheque amount based on interpretation of Section 148 of the Act
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a Criminal Revision Case against the order of the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District, which directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 4,31,335 within 30 days as a condition for suspension of sentence.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the condition imposed by the lower court was onerous and not in line with Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which stipulates a 60-day period for depositing 20% of the cheque amount.
Issues: The main issue was the reasonableness of the condition imposed by the lower court for depositing the cheque amount within 30 days.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and concluded that the period stipulated in the Act to deposit 20% of the cheque amount is 60 days, not 30 days as ordered by the lower court.
Final Decision: The Criminal Revision Case was allowed, and the condition for depositing the cheque amount within 30 days was set aside. The petitioner was permitted to deposit the compensation amount within one month from the date of receipt of the order.
JUDGMENT :
(Prayer: Criminal Revision Case has been filed under Section 397 r/w 401 of Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur in Crl.M.P.No.771 of 2024 in C.A.No.28 of 2024 dated 29.02.2024 and set aside the same, by allowing the Criminal Revision Petition.)
1. This Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the revision petitioner against the order dated 29.02.2024 passed in Crl.M.P.No. 771 of 2024 in C.A.No.28 of 2024 on the file of the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur.
2. The respondent has filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner before the trial Court.
3. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai, by Order, dated 30.01.2024 made in C.C.No.284 of 2022 convicted the revision petitioners/accused for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and directed to pay the cheque amount of Rs.21,56,676/- as compensation to the respondent/complainant, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. Aggrieved by the order of the trial court, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, which was taken on file in C.A.No.28 of 2024 and while moving the Petition for suspension of sentence, the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, suspended the sentence imposed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Aruppukkottai, in C.C.No. 284 of 2022 on 03.01.2024, with certain conditions, by order, dated 29.02.2024 in Cr.M.P.No.771 of 2024 in C.A(MD).No.28 of 2024.
4. The learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, while granting suspension of sentence, imposed certain conditions upon the petitioner. One of the condition is that (1) the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 4,31,335/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Thirty One Thousand Three Hundred and Thirty Five only) before the trial Court within 30 days. Aggrieved by the first condition imposed on the petitioner in Cr.M.P.No.771 of 2024 in C.A.No.28 of 2024, by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, the petitioner has filed the present Criminal Revision.
5. Since no adverse order is going to be passed as against the respondents, notice to the respondents is dispensed with.
6. This Court considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record. 7. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the condition No.1 imposed by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, in directing the petitioner to deposit the cheque amount within 30 days is onerous. But as per Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the condition of deposit imposed by the Court concerned is not reasonable and the period stipulated in the Act to deposit the 20% of the cheque amount is only 60 days and not 30 days as ordered by the Court below and hence, this Court is inclined to allow this Criminal Revision with the above modification.
7. Accordingly this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the order dated 29.02.2024 passed in Cr.M.P.No.771 of 2024 in C.A.No.28 of 2024, by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Virudhunagar District at Srivilliputhur, is set aside in respect of condition No.1. Accordingly, the petitioner is permitted to deposit the compensation amount as ordered by the learned Judge, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Failing to comply with the above condition, the suspension of sentence granted by the Court below shall stand automatically cancelled. The other
AI
The interpretation of Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act regarding the period for depositing the cheque amount influenced the court's decision to modify the condition imposed by the lower ....
The court affirmed the legality of compounding offenses under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act following agreed resolutions between the parties.
Appellate courts must exercise discretion in imposing conditions for suspension of sentence, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case, especially regarding a defendant's financial a....
The appellate court must consider the specifics of each case when determining conditions for suspension of sentence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, allowing flexibility in the deposit requireme....
The condition to deposit 20% of the compensation amount under the Negotiable Instruments Act should consider the individual circumstances of the accused, allowing for exceptions to avoid unjust hards....
The court may suspend sentence upon conditions if substantial grounds are raised in a revision and the petitioner shows willingness to deposit part of the adjudicated amount.
The compensatory nature of proceedings under Section 138 of NI Act and the recoverability of compensation under Section 421 of Cr.P.C were central to the court's decision.
Compounding of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act led to the acquittal of the accused.
The main legal point established is that the drawer of a cheque cannot take advantage of their own fault and must comply with the legal requirements under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Ac....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.