BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 04.12.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.19234 of 2025 M.Shankar ... Petitioner Vs.

1.T.Raja Chidambaram, S/o.Thirtham Pillai

2.The Public Prosecutor, Principal District and Sessions Court, Dindigul. ... Respondents PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, to call for the records and set aside the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.2126 of 2025 in C.A.No.Unnumbered of 2025 by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul and allow the above Criminal Miscellaneous Petition for suspension of sentence without imposing condition to deposit compensation amount.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi, Advocate For R2 : Mr.S.Ravi, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

Challenging the order passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul, in Crl.M.P.No.2126 of 2025 in C.A.No.Unnumbered of 2025 dated 06.11.2025, directing the petitioner to deposit 15% of the cheque amount before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul on or before 04.12.2025, this Criminal Original Petition has been filed.

2. Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that a case has been filed by the first respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in S.T.C.No.450 of 2025 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul, which culminated in convicting the petitioner herein, sentencing him to undergo six months of simple imprisonment and also to pay a compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs only) by order dated 25.08.2025. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul, along with the petition seeking suspension of sentence in Crl.M.P.No.2126 of 2025 in unnumbered appeal. However, the same came to be allowed vide order dated 06.11.2025 on condition that the petitioner shall deposit 15% of the cheque amount on or before 04.12.2025.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that in a connected criminal case in Crime No.13 of 2025 with respect to the same money transaction, on the file of the City Crime Branch, Tiruppur, the petitioner had already suffered incarceration in Central Prison, Coimbatore, till the date of conviction on 25.08.2025 and he was enlarged on bail only after the pronouncement of the judgment dated 25.08.2025 in S.T.C.No.450 of 2025 and hence, he was not at all able to arrange any amount for the purpose of depositing the said compensation. Therefore, he sought for complete exemption from the said direction of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul. 4. In support of his submission, he relied upon the judgment of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.947 of 2024 dated 22.01.2025, wherein it was held that while dealing with an application for suspension of sentence and when an appeal is filed against the conviction for the offence under Section 138 of the Act, the Courts must not mechanically impose the condition of deposit of 20% of compensation amount/cheque amount under Section 148 of the Act. It was also held that when a ground has been raised for reducing the percentage or for exempting the deposit of such amount, it has to be dealt with by the appellate Court and a reasoned order must be passed, if the Court is inclined to direct the appellant to deposit 20% of the compensation amount/cheque amount.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the appellate Court i.e. the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul, failed to pass a reasoned order, while directing the petitioner to pay 15% of the cheque amount. He also pointed out that there is a special circumstance in this case which prevented the petitioner from arranging the amount, as he had been in incarceration till the date of pronouncement of the judgment by the learned trial Court ie., on 25.08.2025. This aspect was not considered by the learned Principal Sessi