IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLREV NO.112 of 2025 (An application U/S. 442 read with Sec. 438 of BNSS, 2023).

Falcon Consultancy Pvt. (cid:0)«(cid:0)(cid:17) Petitioner Ltd., Bhubaneswar -versus-

Rupanjali Sahu (cid:0)«(cid:0)(cid:17) Opposite Party For Petitioner : Mr. R.Roy, Advocate For Opposite : None Party CORAM:

JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY F DATE OF HEARING & JUDGMENT:07.05.2025 (ORAL)

G. Satapathy, J.

1. Challenge in the revision is to the impugned order dated 08.01.2025 passed by the learned Appellate Court directing the revision-

petitioner to pay 20% of the compensation amount which was ordered to be paid to the OP by the learned trial Court while sentencing the revision-petitioner after holding him guilty for commission of offence punishable U/S. 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881(in short, the (cid:0)‡(cid:0)1(cid:0),(cid:0)(cid:3)(cid:0)$(cid:0)F.(cid:0) W(cid:0)·(cid:0)(cid:12)

2. Heard, Mr.Rajeet Roy, learned counsel for the revision-petitioner at the threshold before admission on the point of maintainability of the revision against the impugned order.

3. After having considered the rival submissions upon perusal of record, the only issue arises before this Court right now is whether a revision is maintainable against the impugned order passed by the learned Appellate Court in exercise of power U/S.

148 of NI Act on the ground of it being an interlocutory order so as to bar a revision U/S. 438(2)

of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023(in (cid:0)V(cid:0)K(cid:0)R(cid:0)W(cid:0)(cid:15)(cid:0)(cid:3)(cid:0)W(cid:0)K(cid:0)H(cid:0)(cid:3)(cid:0).‡ (cid:0)%(cid:0)1(cid:0)6(cid:0)6(cid:0)·(cid:0)(cid:12)

4. For clarity, better understanding and to answer the question of maintainability of the revision against the impugned order, the relevant provisions which are Section 148 of the NI Act and Sec. 438(1) & (2) of the BNSS involved in this case, are quoted as under:-

(cid:0)‡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:

Provided that the amount payable under this sub-section shall be in addition to any interim compensation paid by the appellant under section 143-A.

(2) The amount referred to in sub-

section (1) 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.

(3) The Appellate Court may direct the release of the amount deposited by the appellant to the complainant at any time during the pendency of the appeal:

Provided that if the appellant is acquitted , the Court shall direct the complainant to repay to the appellant the amount so released, with interest at the bank rate as published by the Reserve Bank of India, prevalent at the beginning of the relevant financial year, 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 complainant. (cid:0)·

(cid:0)‡438. Calling for records to exercise powers of revision. - (1) The High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any proceedings of such inferior Court, and may, when calling, for such record, direct that the execution of any sentence or order be suspended, and if the accused is in confinement that he be released on his own bond or bail bond pending the