2020 (5) TMI 469 - HC - Indian Laws

Maintainability of application - Dishonor of Cheque - non-payment of 20% of compensation amount as per Section 148 of N.I. Act - petitioner has not challenged any specific order of the Courts below - HELD THAT - On careful reading of the Section 482 of Cr.P.C. it appears that it gives inherent power to the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., there is no necessity to challenge any specific order of any Court, if the aggrieved person feels that the act of anyone is amount to abuse of process of law, he can pray to the High Court to exercise its inherent jurisdiction and pass appropriate direction to secure the ends of justice. Herein, in petition memo, the petitioner prays for specific direction with regard to hearing of appeal and cancellation of order of suspension of sentence and bail granted to the respondent, therefore, there are no force in the ground raised by the respondent s counsel and it is hereby discarded. The appeal is a legal right of the accused and cancellation of bail is not an indefeasible right of the complainant to get the appellants bail canceled but herein, it is pertinent to mention that though appeal is a legal statutory right of the appellant accused but the same cannot be used to abuse the process of law, it is not disputed that bail which was granted to the respondent was conditional in character, i.e. depositing of 20% of the compensation amount and same has been affirmed by this Court in earlier round of litigation. Since, condition stipulated therein has been violated by the respondent, he cannot longer take benefit of the same and plead at this stage that these are his legal right - The respondent cannot be allowed to abuse the process of law and pertinently this aspect has not considered by the learned trial Court. In view of the specific provision of Section 148 N.I. Act with regard to power of Appellate Court ordering of payment in pending appeal against conviction under the N.I. Act, there is no condition to the complainant to approach the Appellate Court for cancellation of bail - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Compliance of Section 148 of N.I. Act before hearing the appeal on merits.
2. Cancellation of suspension of sentence for non-compliance with Section 148 of N.I. Act.
3. Appellant's attendance requirement if not complying with Section 148.
4. Appropriate orders or directions by the Court.

Issue 1: Compliance of Section 148 of N.I. Act before hearing the appeal on merits:
The petitioner filed a criminal case under Section 138 of N.I. Act, leading to the respondent's conviction and sentencing. The respondent appealed the judgment, and the Appellate Court directed him to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within a specified period as per Section 148 of N.I. Act. Despite multiple opportunities and court orders, the respondent failed to comply with the deposit requirement, leading to the issuance of a non-bailable warrant against him. The petitioner sought dismissal of the appeal due to non-compliance with Section 148, emphasizing the mandatory nature of this provision.

Issue 2: Cancellation of suspension of sentence for non-compliance with Section 148 of N.I. Act:
The petitioner contended that the respondent's failure to deposit the required amount or surrender himself as per Section 148 of N.I. Act constitutes disobedience of court orders. Citing a relevant case, the petitioner argued that non-compliance with Section 148 warrants the vacation of the suspension of the sentence. The respondent, however, argued that the appeal and bail are legal rights and cannot be arbitrarily canceled. The Court noted that while appeal is a legal right, it cannot be used to abuse the legal process, especially when the conditions of bail, such as depositing 20% of the compensation amount, are violated.

Issue 3: Appellant's attendance requirement if not complying with Section 148:
The Court highlighted that the respondent's bail was conditional, and by violating the conditions, he cannot claim the benefit of legal rights. The Court emphasized that the respondent's non-compliance with the conditions set by the Appellate Court justifies the vacation of the suspension of sentence and bail. This decision aligns with the interpretation of Section 148 of N.I. Act and the discretionary powers of the Appellate Court in such matters.

Issue 4: Appropriate orders or directions by the Court:
After considering the arguments and legal provisions, the Court found in favor of the petitioner. The Court set aside the order of the Appellate Court and vacated the suspension of sentence and bail due to the respondent's non-compliance with Section 148 and the court directives. The respondent was directed to surrender before the Trial Court for further proceedings related to the appeal. The judgment underscores the importance of complying with legal provisions and court orders in criminal cases involving the N.I. Act to ensure the integrity of the legal process and prevent abuse of legal rights.