AI Overview...
-
20% Deposit Requirement - Courts frequently mandate the deposit of 20% of the fine or compensation amount during appeals under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act). This condition aims to balance the appellant's right to appeal with the need to ensure compliance and deter frivolous appeals. Several judgments (e.g., Mangla Prasad Singh Vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another - Allahabad, Parminder Singh Saini VS State of Haryana - Punjab and Haryana, G. k. Construction Company, Through Its Owner Govind Katariya S/o Chandmal Katariya VS Balaji Makan Samagri Stores, Through Its Proprietor Mallaram Patel - Rajasthan) affirm that this deposit is a procedural safeguard, and courts are expected to provide reasons for imposing or waiving this requirement. Failure to record proper reasons can be grounds for challenging the order (ANUJ AHUJA Vs SUMITRA MITTAL - Delhi, Mohammad Javad Farooqui VS State of Uttar Pradesh - Allahabad).
-
Legal Rationale - The deposit serves to uphold the integrity of the judicial process while not violating the right to appeal, as courts have held that the 20% deposit does not violate constitutional rights when justified ( Mangla Prasad Singh Vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another - Allahabad, Parminder Singh Saini VS State of Haryana - Punjab and Haryana). The courts emphasize that such conditions are procedural and aim to prevent abuse of the appellate process.
-
Exceptions and Waivers - Courts may waive or reduce the 20% deposit if sufficient reasons are recorded, especially when the appellant demonstrates financial hardship or lack of merit in the case (ANUJ AHUJA Vs SUMITRA MITTAL - Delhi, Mohammad Javad Farooqui VS State of Uttar Pradesh - Allahabad). The importance of detailed reasoning in orders is underscored to avoid arbitrary decisions.
-
Misconceptions about Deposit Necessity - The argument that a 20% deposit is unnecessary or that no cheque was issued (e.g., Mohammad Javad Farooqui VS State of Uttar Pradesh - Allahabad) is generally rejected unless the court finds a lack of basis for conviction, such as absence of issuance or consideration.
-
Additional Context - In cases involving dishonored cheques, the courts have consistently upheld the deposit condition to ensure compliance with appellate procedures, without infringing on the accused's rights, provided the reasons are properly recorded (Mithun Modak VS Deepak Kumar Sharma - Calcutta, G. k. Construction Company, Through Its Owner Govind Katariya S/o Chandmal Katariya VS Balaji Makan Samagri Stores, Through Its Proprietor Mallaram Patel - Rajasthan).
Analysis and Conclusion:
The consensus across judgments indicates that a 20% deposit of the fine or compensation amount during appeals under Section 138 NI Act is a procedural requirement intended to uphold judicial integrity. While some cases question its necessity, courts generally uphold it when properly justified, and it does not violate constitutional rights. The deposit acts as a safeguard against frivolous appeals but can be waived or reduced with adequate reasoning, especially in cases of hardship or merit-based considerations.
Search Results for "Diposit 20 Percent of Cheque is Not Necessary"
2019 0 Supreme(Mad) 2141 • India - Madras
N.ANAND VENKATESH
exceeding thirty days as may be directed by Court on sufficient cause being shown by drawer of cheque - If drawer of cheque is acquitted ... the Court on sufficient cause being shown by the complainant – Section 143-A of Negotiable Instruments Act was inserted by Act 20 ... given any reason as to why it is directing accused persons to pay an interim compensation of 20% to complainant - As held by this ... (2) The interim ....
1997 0 Supreme(Del) 127 • India - Delhi
M.JAGANNADHA RAO, MANMOHAN SARIN
They also claimed that the cheque for Rs. 16,93,867.70 was issued as an advance for the supply of marble, not as part of the share ... appellants raised triable issues regarding the consideration for the share purchase agreement and the replacement of a post-dated cheque ... for recovery of Rs. 5 lakhs as damages for non-supply of marble, which raised a contentious issue regarding the purpose of the cheque ... ... ( 22 ) ....
2024 Supreme(Online)(ALL) 784 • India - High Court of Allahabad (Lucknow Bench)
Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
, 26) ... ... Facts of the case: ... The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 for issuing a dishonored cheque ... (Paras 12, 20) ... ... (C) Findings of Court - The petitioner is directed to deposit 20% of the ... ... ... Findings of Court: ... The Appellate Court's order was modified to require the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine within ... As the contesting parties ....
2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 3016 • India - Punjab and Haryana
NAMIT KUMAR
9-10) ... ... Facts of the case: ... The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 for dishonoring a cheque ... ... ... Findings of Court: ... The direction for a 20% deposit does not violate the right to appeal and serves the purpose of the ... The Appellate Court conditioned bail on a 20% deposit of the compensation amount. ... Cheque No.000045 dated 22.03.2105....
2025 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 864 • India - High Court of Delhi
MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE, J
He was convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act for cheque dishonour (Paras 3, 5). ... of compensation amount - Petitioner sought waiver of 20% deposit for appeals against conviction under Section 138 - The petitioner ... ... ... Findings of Court: ... The learned ASJ's orders lacked sufficient reasoning to justify the mandatory deposit of 20%, leading ... That also shows that a speaking order is #HL_....
2024 0 Supreme(All) 1018 • India - Allahabad
ABDUL MOIN
not doing so, which was necessary to justify a waiver of the deposit requirement. ... The applicant argued that no cheque had been issued, and thus, there was no basis for his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable ... Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellate court must record reasons for not imposing the deposit ... The contention is that when from the merits of the c....
2023 0 Supreme(Cal) 49 • India - Calcutta
SHAMPA DUTT PAUL
: The Appellate Court's power to order the appellant to deposit a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial ... Whether the Appellate Court's power to order the appellant to deposit a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation under Section ... The court held that the Appellate Court's power to order the appellant to deposit a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensat....
2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 710 • India - Rajasthan
DINESH MEHTA
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 482 –Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Section 138, 148, – Dissolution of cheque ... of minimum 20% of fine amount during pendency of an appeal against conviction under section 138 of Act. ... to impose condition of depositing minimum 20% of fine amount, is required to be dilated upon at some length – Whether by contriving ... In light of the discussion foregoing, a purposive interpretation of sectio....
2005 8 Supreme 683 • India - Supreme Court
ASHOK BHAN, ALTAMAS KABIR
State Industrial Investment Corporation of Maharashtra Limited, is a company established by Government of Maharashtra with 100 percent ... (Para 20) ... It was admitted before the High Court that outstanding ... This direction of the High Court holds good and does not call for any interference. ... The appellant issued a cheque of Rs. 20 lakhs towards OTS which was dishonoured on presentation. ... To appr....
2003 0 Supreme(Del) 295 • India - Delhi
VIKRAMAJIT SEN
together with the interest thereon calculated at the rate of twelve per cent per annum from the date of the issuance of each of the cheque ... since it is not the Defendants case that the bounced cheques were in respect of another series of transactions. ... Although there is no material available on the record to indicate that deliveries were not effected, I need not go into this question ... n....
Filter by Legal Phrase
