Kaluvala Rammohan vs Aheer Kapil Yadav - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 23572

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 23572

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. Sujana, J
Kaluvala Rammohan – Appellant
Versus
Aheer Kapil Yadav – Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.659 of 2026

Important Points

The Court reduced the mandatory deposit for suspension of sentence from 20% to 10% of the cheque amount, citing the petitioner's financial inability and following the Supreme Court's precedent in Jambu Bandari vs. Madhya Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Limited.

Subject

Criminal Law - Negotiable Instruments Act

Act Referred

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
Negotiable Instruments Act

Headnote

(A) Criminal Revision - Suspension of Sentence - Deposit of cheque amount - Reduction of deposit percentage from 20% to 10% based on the financial inability of the petitioner and judicial precedent. (Para 5, 6)

Issues: Whether the condition to deposit 20% of the cheque amount for suspension of sentence can be reduced due to the petitioner's inability to pay.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P. N. Dayakar
For the Respondents: D. Arun Kumar

Table of Content
1. procedural history and background of the revision petition regarding the deposit condition for suspension of sentence. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. petitioner's submission regarding financial inability to meet the 20% deposit requirement. (Para 4)
3. reduction of the deposit amount to 10% based on judicial precedent and the petitioner's circumstances. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER:

This Criminal Revision Case is filed by the revision petitioner aggrieved by the order dated 05.01.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.01 of 2026 in Crl.A.No.624 of 2025 in C.C.NI.No.117 of 2023 (STC.NI.No.2721 of 2021 by the learned Special Judge for Trial of Offences under S.Cs and S.Ts (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional Sessions Judge, Secunderabad. By the impugned order, the petition filed by the petitioner, was allowed directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the trial Court had imposed the sentence and the appellate Court had allowed the petition filed by the petitioner by suspending the sentence passed by the trial Court on a condition that the appellant/accused shall deposit 20% of the cheque amount in the trial Court within 60 days. Further, the petitioner herein was failed to deposit the same, NBW was issued to the petitoner. Aggrieved by the said condition, the present criminal revision case is filed by the petitioner.

3. Heard Sri P. N. Dayakar, learned counsel for revision petitioner as well as Sri D. Arun Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is unable to deposit 20% of the cheque amount. Hence, he requested the Court to reduce the same.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and in view of the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Jambu Bandari vs. Madhya Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Limited , Crl.A.No.2741 of 2023 dated 04.09.2023, this Court is inclined to reduce the fine amount from 20% to 10% to be deposited by the revision petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is disposed of directing the revision petitioner to deposit 10% of the cheque amount i.e., Rs.1,20,000/-(Rs.12,00,000/- x 10%) before the trial Court, within a period of one (01) month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Upon such deposit, it is open to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the trial Court seeking recall of the Non-Bailable Warrant.

Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.