##PAGE1##

CRM-M-18175-2026 (O&M) -1-

157

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

-.-

CRM-M-18175-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 06.04.2026

Parveen Kaur ....Petitioner

VERSUS

Vijay Kumar and Another ....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY

Present: Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Mahipal Singh Atwal, DAG Punjab for respondent No.2.

-.-

AMAN CHAUDHARY J. (Oral)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, for quashing the order dated 19.02.2026, Annexure P-3, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fazilka, vide which the petitioner has been directed to deposit 20%

of the compensation amount in 60 days.

2. Learned counsel submits that sentence of the petitioner, aged 32 years, was suspended, vide the aforesaid order dated 19.02.2026, but she was directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within a period of 60 days from the date of said order. The imposition of such stringent and onerous condition is unjust. He prays that the same are liable to be quashed on account of his family exigencies

and poor financial status.

3. Heard

TRIPTI SAINI

2026.04.07 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-18175-2026 (O&M) -2-

4. Reference is made to the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs. MP State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd.

2023(10) SCC 446, the relevant paras whereof reads thus:

“6. What is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Hence, normally, Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the Appellate Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can be made for the reasons

specifically recorded.

7. Therefore, when Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusion

must be recorded.”

5. In Muskan Enterprises and another vs. State of Punjab 2024 SCConline SC 4107, Hon’ble the Supreme Court remitted the matter to the Sessions Court to re-examine the issue of ordering deposit by observing that, “Whether sufficient ground has been made out by the appellants to persuade the Sessions Court not to order any deposit is left entirely to its discretion and satisfaction. We do not express any opinion on the plea that the appellants have sought to advance before us, lest any party seeks to derive any advantage. All

points are left open.”

TRIPTI SAINI

2026.04.07 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-18175-2026 (O&M) -3-

6. In light of the aforesaid, the condition imposed to deposit 20% of compensation amount vide order dated 19.02.2026, Annexure P-3, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fazilka, is set aside. The learned Appellate Court to reconsider the matter afresh, as per the observations made in the aforesaid

judgments, granting an opportunity to the petitioner.

7. Till the decision is taken, sentence of the petitioner shall remain suspended. The petitioner is directed to appear through his counsel before the learned Appellate Court on or before 08.04.2026, failing which, this order shall

stand vacated automatically.

8. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

9. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

April 06, 2026 (AMAN CHAUDHARY tripti JUDGE

Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No

TRIPTI SAINI

2026.04