HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA Crl. Rev. P. No.49 of 2025 Sri Arjun Banik Age-45 years, S/o-Lt. Haripada Banik, R/o-Nutan Bazaar, P.S.-NTB, District-Gomati, Tripura.

---- Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. Sri Swapan Saha S/o-Late Chitta Ranjan Saha, Of-Nutan Bazar, P.S.-Nutan Bazar, Amarpur, Dist-Gomati Tripura.

2. The State of Tripura ----Respondent(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Arjun Acharjee, Adv.

Ms. Moon Basu, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, PP.

Mr. Sankar Lodh, Adv.

Date of hearing and Delivery of judgment : 20.01.2026.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT Judgment & Order (Oral)

20.01.2026 Heard learned counsel Mr. A Acharjee, appearing on behalf of the petitioner-convict Sri Arjun Banik and also heard Mr. S Lodh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1, Sri Swapan Saha and leaned PP Mr. R Datta, appearing on behalf of the State respondent. 2. This revision petition is filed challenging the order District, Udaipur in Criminal Appeal No. 04/2024. By the said order the appeal filed by the present petitioner convict was disposed of without contest. Taking part in the hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner drawn the attention of the court that by a judgment dated 18.03.2024 passed by learned JM 1^st Class, Amarpur, Gomati District in CR(NI) 06/2022 the present petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act and was sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 4,20,000/- in default to suffer SI for one year and challenging that judgment/order the present petitioner preferred an appeal before the court of the Sessions Judge which was assigned to the court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gomati District, Udaipur. The appeal was numbered as Crl.A. 04/20024. Before the appellate court the present respondent-complainant on 19.11.2024 filed one application under Section 143A(1) of NI Act supplying copy to the other side and on the prayer of the respondent complainant the present petitioner was asked to file his objection but the appellant did not file any objection. So by order dated 28.05.2025 a direction was given by the learned Appellate court to the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine money awarded by learned JM 1^st Class, Amarpur, Gomati District before that court. But the petitioner convict failed to deposit the same on time resulting which by order dated 15.07.2025 the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution and the petitioner was directed to surrender before the learned trial court to suffer the sentence.

3. Learned counsel further submitted that the said order District suffers from infirmity as because the respondent complainant ought to have filed the petition under Section 148 of the NI Act but instead of filing the same under Section 148 of the NI Act the respondent complainant filed the petition under Section 143A of the NI Act before the court quoting wrong provisions of law and the learned appellate court without considering the said provision passed an order under Section 143A(1) of NI Act and directed the present petitioner-convict to deposit 20% of the compensation/fine which itself shows non-application of mind and the order itself suffers from perversity and as such the same needs to be interfered with.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel Mr. S Lodh appearing on behalf of the respondent-complainant drawn the attention of the court referring different orders passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gomati District, Udaipur and submitted that since the present petitioner-convict failed to deposit 20% of the fine money, so the direction of the learned appellate court was not improper but he fairly submitted that the order ought to have been passed under Section 148(1) of the NI Act.

5. Learned counsel Mr. Lodh further submitted that as per sub-section (2) of Section 148 the period for deposit of the fine amount has already expired. So at this stage there is no scope to pass any direction for suspending the sentence. Now the petitioner is either to deposit the entire amount or suffer imprisonment as per orde