2020 (12) TMI 1076 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - It is contended by the petitioner's counsel that as per section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which came into force on 01.09.2018, by virtue of the Amendment Act 20 of 2018, the appellate court is competent to direct the petitioner only to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court - section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - HELD THAT - On a reading of section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, it is evident that pending appeal, the appellate court is competent to direct the appellant/accused to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court. In such view of the matter, the impugned order passed by the Court below directing the petitioner/accused to deposit 20% of the cheque amount is found to be erroneous and liable to be setaside, particularly when the petitioner/accused has been directed by the trial court to pay only a fine of ₹ 10,000/- alone and also to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. The impugned order is set aside - Petition disposed off.

Issues:
1. Interpretation of section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act regarding the appellate court's power to order payment pending appeal against conviction.
2. Validity of the direction to deposit 20% of the cheque amount by the Court below.
3. Correction of the error in the impugned order and setting aside the same.
4. Direction to the petitioner/accused to deposit 20% of the fine imposed by the trial court.
5. Request for expeditious disposal of the Criminal Appeal due to the pandemic situation.

Issue 1: Interpretation of Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act:
The petitioner challenged the direction to deposit 20% of the cheque amount, citing section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Act empowers the appellate court to order the appellant to deposit a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court. In this case, the trial court had imposed a fine of ?10,000 and a one-year simple imprisonment. The Court found the direction to deposit 20% of the cheque amount erroneous and set it aside, directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the ?10,000 fine instead.

Issue 2: Validity of the Direction to Deposit 20% of the Cheque Amount:
The Court noted that the direction by the Court below for the petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount was incorrect. The appellate court's power under section 148 of the Act is limited to ordering a deposit of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court. As the trial court had only imposed a fine of ?10,000 and simple imprisonment, the direction to deposit a percentage of the cheque amount was deemed erroneous and set aside.

Issue 3: Correction of the Error in the Impugned Order:
The impugned order directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount was found to be incorrect. The Court set aside this order and instead directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the ?10,000 fine imposed by the trial court to the credit of the Criminal Appeal. This correction was made in accordance with the provisions of section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Issue 4: Direction to Deposit 20% of the Fine Imposed by the Trial Court:
In correcting the error in the impugned order, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the ?10,000 fine imposed by the trial court within 60 days. This direction aligned with the provisions of the Act and rectified the previous incorrect order that had called for a deposit based on the cheque amount rather than the fine imposed.

Issue 5: Request for Expeditious Disposal of the Criminal Appeal:
Considering the pandemic situation and restricted court functioning due to COVID-19, the Court directed the Court below to dispose of the Criminal Appeal expeditiously. The request for a suitable direction to expedite the appeal's disposal was made by the respondent's counsel, and the Court deemed it necessary to ensure timely resolution of the case given the prevailing circumstances.

In conclusion, the High Court of Madras clarified the interpretation of section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, corrected the error in the impugned order, and directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine imposed by the trial court. Additionally, the Court emphasized the need for expeditious disposal of the Criminal Appeal due to the ongoing pandemic situation.

← Previous Next →