Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K.T. Thomas and R.P. Sethi, JJ.
Stanny Felix Pinto - Petitioner
Versus
M/s. Jangid Builders Pvt. Ltd. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 2001 (Arising out of SLP (Cri.) No. 26 of 2001).
Decided On : 15 January, 2001
Suspension of Sentence - Negotiable Instruments Act - Imposition of Condition for Remittance of Fine
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to imprisonment and fine, appealed to the High Court for suspension of the sentence. The High Court granted suspension of the sentence with a condition that part of the fine shall be remitted within a specified time.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the High Court's imposition of a condition for remittance of the fine while suspending the sentence was done correctly and in the interest of justice. It was deemed advisable to impose such a condition, especially when the fine amount was heavy.
Issues: The issue was whether the High Court's imposition of a condition for remittance of the fine while suspending the sentence was just and in accordance with the law.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that it is advisable for the Court to impose a condition that the fine part is remitted within a certain period when suspending the sentence for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, especially if the fine amount is heavy.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the Court upheld the High Court's decision to impose a condition for remittance of the fine as a requirement for suspending the sentence.
ORDER
K.T. Thomas, J. - Leave granted.
2. When a person was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to imprisonment and fine he moved the superior Court for suspension of the sentence. The High Court while entertaining his revision granted suspension of the sentence by imposing a condition that part of the fine shall be remitted in Court within a specified time. It is against the said direction that this petition has been filed. In our view the High Court has done it correctly and in the interest of justice. We feel that while suspending the sentence for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act it is advisable that the Court imposes a condition that the fine part is remitted within a certain period. If the fine amount is heavy, the Court can direct atleast a portion thereof to be remitted as the convicted person wants the sentence to be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. In this case the grievance of the appellant is that he is required by the High Court to remit a huge amount of rupees four lacs as a condition to suspend the sentence. When considering the total amount of fine imposed by the trial Court (twenty lacs of rupees) there is nothing unjust or unconscionable in imposing such a condition. Hence, there is no need to interfere with the impugned order. As such no notice need be issued to the respondent. Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
Appeal dismissed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
