9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (1) TMI 3 - HC - Indian LawsDishonor of Cheque - quantum of conviction - payment of compensation to victim - HELD THAT - Section 148 of the NI Act has been introduced through an amendment w.e.f. 01.09.2018 wherein it is stipulated that the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such amount which shall be a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court. It is further provided that the amount payable under this Section would be in addition to any interim compensation paid by the appellant under Section 143A of the NI Act. The petitioner had preferred an appeal against the quantum of conviction and the Appellate Court in the order dated 24.02.2020, while suspending the sentence of the appellant, did not direct the petitioner (appellant therein) to pay any amount in terms of Section 148 of the NI Act by misreading the judgment of the trial Court convicting the petitioner and directing him to pay the cheque amount. The direction issued by the trial Court to pay the cheque amount, could not in any manner be construed that no compensation had been awarded. The Supreme Court in the case of SURINDER SINGH DESWAL @ COL. S.S. DESWAL AND OTHERS VERSUS VIRENDER GANDHI 2019 (5) TMI 1626 - SUPREME COURT as well as in the case of G.J. RAJA VERSUS TEJRAJ SURANA 2019 (8) TMI 91 - SUPREME COURT had granted four weeks' further time to the appellants therein to make the payment. There are no infirmity in the order passed by the Appellate Court directing the petitioner to pay 25% of the compensation amount and therefore, the petition stands dismissed.
Issues:
1. Imposition of condition to deposit compensation amount during appeal. 2. Interpretation of Section 357 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 148 of the NI Act. 3. Application of Section 362 of the Cr.P.C. 4. Granting of additional time to deposit compensation amount. Analysis: 1. The petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act and sentenced to imprisonment and payment of a cheque amount. The Appellate Court suspended the sentence but later directed the petitioner to deposit 25% of the compensation amount. The petitioner argued that this condition could only be imposed if compensation was awarded by the trial Court. However, the Court noted that the cheque amount itself could be considered as compensation. The Appellate Court's direction was found to be valid during the appeal, as it was not a final order disposing of the matter. 2. Section 357 of the Cr.P.C. allows for the imposition of compensation to the victim in case of a fine. Additionally, Section 148 of the NI Act mandates the deposit of a certain percentage of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court during an appeal. The Court highlighted that the Appellate Court's order to deposit 25% of the compensation was in line with these provisions, and it was not a review or modification of the previous order. 3. Section 362 of the Cr.P.C. restricts the alteration or review of a judgment after the case has been finally disposed of. The Court clarified that this bar applies only after the matter has been conclusively resolved. Therefore, the Appellate Court's direction to deposit the compensation amount during the appeal did not violate this provision as it was not a final order. 4. The petitioner requested additional time to deposit the amount due to financial difficulties. Citing precedents, the Court granted the petitioner thirty more days to fulfill the payment obligation. Ultimately, the Court upheld the Appellate Court's decision to direct the petitioner to pay 25% of the compensation amount and dismissed the petition. This detailed analysis of the judgment provides a comprehensive understanding of the legal issues involved and the Court's reasoning behind its decision.
|
