SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 2937

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH PATEL – Appellant
Versus
NIRAKAR NAYAK – Respondent
CRMP/307/2026



##PAGE1##

1

Digitally signed

by SHUBHAM

SHUBHAM SINGH

SINGH RAGHUVANSHI

RAGHUVANSHI Date:

2026.01.31

17:37:12 +0530

2026:CGHC:5225

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

CRMP No. 307 of 2026

Ramesh Patel S/o Paltan Patel Aged About 48 Years Caste-

Aghariya, R/o Village- Linjir, Police Station Baramkela And

District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh C.G.

... Petitioner

versus

Nirakar Nayak S/o Ghurau Nayak Aged About 38 Years Caste-

Aghariya, R/o Village Parsada (Chote), Police Station- Sarangarh,

District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh C.G., At Present R/o Tamnar,

Police Station And Tahsil Tamnar, District Raigarh C.G.

... Respondent

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Saraf, Advocate

For Respondent : Not noticed

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswa l

Order on Board

30.01.2026

1 Heard.

2

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under

Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 being aggrieved by the

##PAGE2##

2

impugned order dated 09.12.2025 passed in Criminal

Appeal No. 12/2025 by the Learned Sessions Judge,

Gharghoda, District Raigarh (C.G.) whereby the learned

Sessions Court has imposed a condition of depositing 20%

of the compensation amount within 60 days while

suspending the execution of the judgment dated

10.11.2025 on an application preferred under Section 430

(1) of BNSS, 2023.

3

Brief facts of the case are that the respondent/complainant

filed a case under Section 138 of N.I. Act against the

petitioner and submitted that the petitioner was taken a

loan of Rs. 9,00,000/- from him and for the payment of the

said loan amount, one cheque amounting to Rs.

9,00,000/- was issued to him and upon production of the

said cheque the said cheque was dishonoured for

insufficient funds. The learned trial Court after taking into

consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and

evidence adduced in the case passed the judgment dated

10.11.2025 and convicted the present petitioner and

sentenced him to ungdergo rigorous imprisonment for 1

year and directed to pay compensation under Section

357(3) of Cr.P.C. of Rs. 9,00,000/- within the appeal

limitation period and for non deposition of the said amount

three months S.I. was ordered. Being aggrieved by the

order dated 10.11.2025 the petitioner preferred a Criminal

Appeal under Section 415 of BNSS, 2023 before the

Learned appellate Court along with an application under

Section 430 (1) of BNSS, 2023 for suspension of execution

of order dated 10.11.2025 which got allowed with a

condition that petitioner shall deposit 20% of the

##PAGE3##

3

compensation amount within 60 days while suspending

the execution of the order dated 10.11.2025.

4

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the word

'may' has been used in Section 148 of the N.I. Act and the

Appellate Court has used discretion but has not given any

reason for the same. The learned appellate court has

committed grave error while passing the impugned order

dated 09.12.2025 and has wrongly imposed a condition of

depositing 20% of the compensation amount while

suspending the execution of order dated 10.11.2025. The

learned Appellate court has without following the

provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and

without considering the facts material available on record

passed the impugned order, hence it is liable to be

quashed.

5 Since the issue before this Court hinges upon the

interpretation of Section 148 of the N.I. Act, which was

subsequently incorporated to the N.I. Act vide the

Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2018 (Act No. 20

of 2018), the relevant part thereof is reproduced

hereunder:-

1["148. Power of Appellate Court to order

payment pending appeal against conviction.-

(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), 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:

1 Inserted by Act No. 20 of 2018, w.e.f. 1-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top