THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10175 of 2025 ORDER:-

1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking to set-aside the order dated 16.07.2025 passed in Crl.M.P.No.212 of 2025 in Crl.A.No.1462 of 2024, on the file of Additional Sessions Judge for Trial of Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Case-cum- Additional Family Court –cum- XXIII Additional Chief Judge –cum- IX Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

2. Heard Mr. D.C.Mahaboob Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused as well as Sri Jitender Rao Veeramalla, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1-State.

3. Though notice is served upon respondent No.2, none appeared before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Trial Court has not assigned any reasons for directing the petitioner herein to deposit 20% of the compensation amount as a condition while suspending the sentence. He further submitted that it is not mandatory for the First Appellate Court to direct the compensation amount to be deposited and that the petitioner is a retired Government Doctor and is not able to pay such a huge amount and that altogether five cases have been filed against him and in all the 5 cases, he is directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount and being not able to gather his resources to deposit the same, he therefore prayed to relax the said condition. The counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in JAMBOO BHANDARI VS. M P STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOMENT CORPORATION LTD & ORS, 2023 Law Suit (SC) 911

5. Learned counsel further submitted that a joint memo was forcibly got entered for Rs.93 lakhs and that they got it signed by the petitioner herein for Rs.1,35,00,000/- and that the petitioner herein never agreed to pay the said amount and that he is not liable to pay any amounts to the defacto complainant.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that in all the five cases, the petitioner herein was convicted and that the petitioner has also entered into a Memorandum of Understanding and undertook to pay Rs.1,35,00,000/- in installments and that they waited for a considerable period of time but the petitioner has not paid any amounts even after the decree passed by the Trial Court in the Suits. He further submitted that after judgment of conviction being passed by the Trial Court, he was evading the process of law and he has also not made the payments. Pursuant to issuance of Non-Bailable Warrant, he was arrested and then he approached the First Appellate Court with a suspension petition in which the impugned orders are passed. He further submitted that the defacto complainant is 80 years old person and is still waiting for the amounts to be paid to him by the petitioner herein. He further submitted that the Trial Court has passed a well reasoned order and hence prayed to uphold the same and dismiss the present petition.

7. Perused the record. The record discloses that there was a suit filed vide O.S.No.25 of 2021 before the Trial Court based on the promissory notes and the present case was filed under N.I Act. It is also alleged that an MOU was entered by the petitioner with the defacto complainant agreeing to pay Rs.1,35,00,000/- towards full and final settlement and that he paid an amount of Rs.40,00,000/- to the respondent herein and several dates were stipulated to make the entire payment by 15.11.2024. As per the submissions of the learned counsel for respondent, the petitioner failed to pay balance amount of Rs.95,00,000/-. However, the fact remains on record that he was convicted in five NI Act cases including the present one.

When the petitioner herein carried the matter in Appeal along with a petition to suspend the sentence, the said petition was allowed by the First Appellate Court. The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail on execution of personal bond for Rs.