the complainant alleging that the accused in discharge of his legal liability towards the complainant, issued two post dated cheques 428184 and 584442 amounting to Rs.20,00,000/-(Rs.12 lacs + Rs.8 Lacs) drawn at Corporation Bank, Branch Jhajjar and Oriental Bank of Commerce, Branch B-1, Basant Kunj, New Delhi. On presentation of the same, the same were dishonoured and returned with the remarks ‘funds insufficient’ vide memo dated

04.04.2017.

3. Vide judgment of conviction dated 04.07.2023 and order of sentence dated 10.07.2023 passed by learned trial Court, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to return the amount of cheques i.e. Rs.20,00,000/- and to pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal against the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar. The learned Appellate Court vide order dated 08.08.2023 suspended the sentence of the petitioner. On 05.04.2025, respondent No.1 moved an application under Section 148 of N.I. Act alleging that the petitioner was under obligation to pay 20% of the cheque amount. Vide order dated 28.05.2025, learned Additional Sessions Judge, directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount as the same was the condition, which was imposed upon the petitioner at the time of granting suspension of sentence by learned trial Court.

4. Thereafter, upon moving of the application for exemption for depositing the 20% of the compensation amount, the appellate Court vide order dated 29.05.2025 held that the Court cannot review its own order, as waiver will also tantamount to reviewing of order and the said application was dismissed. Rs.2,00,000/- were received by the complainant/ respondent from the petitioner out of interim compensation subject to final outcome of the present appeal and 07 days time was granted to the petitioner to make payment of remaining amount of compensation on or before 05.06.2025.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contended that vide order dated 28.05.2025, the petitioner was directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount only on the basis of assumption that while granting suspension of sentence by trial Court, a condition had been imposed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, which was not complied by the petitioner and held that the non compliance of the same ought to have resulted into vacation of suspension of sentence. He vehemently contended that the same is absolutely wrong as no such condition was imposed by learned Appellate Court at the time of admission of appeal and adjudication of application for suspension of sentence. Learned Appellate Court completely overlooked the settled law that reasons have to be recorded while directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount, as rule under Section 148 of N.I. Act, is not an absolute rule and reasons have to be recorded as to why it is mandatory for the petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount. This fact was also ignored that the petitioner had already deposited Rs.2,00,000/- on 29.05.2025. Learned Appellate Court passed the impugned orders in very casual manner without recording any reasons, which are liable to be set aside.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. and others, 2023(4) RCR (Criminal) 296, held as under "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