##PAGE1##

CRR-3304-2025 (O&M) 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

154

CRR-3304-2025 (O&M)

Date of Decision: December 22, 2025

Pal Singh

......Petitioner

Versus

Sutlej Gramin Bank formerly known as Faridkot Bathinda Kshetriya

Bank

......Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present: Mr. Jaskirat Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J.

CRM-52317-2025:

I. Present application has been filed for condonation of delay of

75 days in filing the accompanying criminal revision petition.

II. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is

allowed.

III. Delay of 75 days in filing the accompanying criminal revision

petition is condoned.

CRR-3304-2025

1. This petition, under Section 438 of the BNSS, 2023, has been

filed by the petitioner assailing the order dated 07.07.2025, passed by

learned Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib (Appellate Court), while deciding

the application for suspension of sentence, filed by the petitioner alongwith

the appeal preferred against the judgement of conviction and order of

sentence, dated 12.06.2025, passed by the Trial Court, while deciding

complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for

short, ‘the NI Act’).

2. For the sake of brevity, the basic details of this petition have

been summed up in tabular form, as under:-

1 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 12-01-2026 05:26:32 :::

CRR-3304-2025 (O&M) 2

1. Complaint No. Complaint No. NACT-1313-2018, dated

13.11.2018, under Section 138 of the NI

Act

2. Judgment of conviction 12.06.2025, passed by Judicial Magistrate

Ist Class, Malout, District Sri Muktsar

Sahib (Trial Court)

3. Criminal Appeal No. CRA/103/2025

4. Date of impugned order 07.07.2025, passed by Sessions Judge, Sri

Muktsar Sahib (Appellate Court)

3. The issue involved in this petition is no longer res integra, and

the same has been answer by the Larger Bench/Division Bench of this Court,

vide detailed order dated 24.09.2025, passed in the case of M/s Coromandel

International Limited v. Shri Ambica Sales Corporation, Law Finder

Doc Id # 2783918 : 2025 (4) RCR (Criminal) 490

4. Thereafter, by following the view point of the Larger

Bench/Division Bench in the matter of M/s Coromandel International

Limited, this Court also passed a detailed order in the case of Shivam

Jindal v. Shubhan Ali (CRM-M-56288-2025 (O&M), decided on

17.11.2025) and other connected petitions

5. In view of above, matter in hand is required to be sent back to

the Appellate Court, for decision afresh on the application for suspension of

sentence of the appellant/petitioner herein, in consonance with the order

dated 24.09.2025, passed by the Larger Bench/Division Bench of this Court

in the case of M/s Coromandel International Limited (supra), and

subsequent order dated 17.11.2025, passed by this Court in the case of

Shivam Jindal (supra)

6. Ordered accordingly.

7. The said exercise shall be undertaken by the Appellate Court

not later than 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this

order, and after issuing notice(s) to the respective parties.

8. Further, it is directed that till the time application for suspension

of sentence is decided afresh, the condition of deposit of 20% of the

compensation amount, as directed by the Appellate Court in its earlier order,

shall remain inoperative, and the bail shall not be cancelled in consequence

thereof.

2 of 3

::: Downloaded on - 12-01-2026 05:26:33 :::

CRR-3304-2025 (O&M) 3

9. In case the Appellate Court, after re-appreciation of the matter,

comes to the conclusion that the deposits are expensive than the liberty, and

the convict is not in a position to deposit and likely to forego his liberty even

when the first appeal is yet to be decided, the Appellate Court must make

efforts to prioritize hearing appeal filed against the conviction under Section

of the 148 NI Act and decide the same preferably within next sixty days of

passing of fresh order, and not later than ninety days, which clearly aligns

with the legislators’ intentions. However, the ti