Allowed

Sayed Meer Sadiq Hussain v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Andhra Pradesh HC4 Nov 2022CRLP/8724/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted a further 60-day extension to the petitioner for depositing 20% of compensation ordered in a cheque-bounce case, noting that failure would result in setting aside the suspension of the trial court's sentence.

What did the court decide?

Granted 60 days extension from the date of order to deposit 20% of compensation; failure leads to setting aside suspension.

Sayed Meer Sadiq Hussain Vs The State of Andhra… — Cheque Dishonour | Andhra Pradesh HC (2022)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8724 of 2022

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

The petitioner was convicted for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in C.C.No.379 of 2016 by the II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Rajamahendravaram on 18.07.2022 and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one year and for payment of compensation of Rs.12,48,000/-.

¶4

The petitioner had appealed against this order by way of Criminal Appeal No.233 of 2022 on the file of the V Additional District and Sessions Judge Court, East Godavari District at Rajamahendravaram. The Appellate Court, while suspending the judgement and sentence of the Trial Court in Crl.Mp No.152 of 2022 had directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within 60 days from the date of the order. The petitioner, contending that he could not comply with the directions of the Appellate Court due to illness, had sought extension of time for deposit of the compensation amount. This application was allowed by the Appellate Court granting time up to 13.11.2022 for deposit of the 20% of the compensation amount.

¶5

¶6

The petitioner, having failed to comply with the said order, has now approached this Court, by way of the present Criminal Petition for further extension of time.

¶7

In the normal course, there are no reasons for this Court to intervene in such a matter as there is neither abuse of the process of the Court nor any other reason for this Court to intervene in the matter under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶8

However, since deposit of the compensation amount would aid the complainant, this Court grants further period of 60 days from today, for the petitioner to deposit the 20% of the compensation amount, as directed by the Appellate Court. Failure to deposit the same would mean that the order of suspension granted by the Appellate Court would stand set aside.

¶9

Accordingly, Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶10

Miscellaneous petitions, pending if any, shall stand

¶11

closed.

¶12

____________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J

¶13

04.11.2022 MJA

¶14

¶15

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO

¶16

CRIMINAL PETITION NO.8724 of 2022

¶17

04.11.2022

¶18

MJA

Sayed Meer Sadiq Hussain v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayed Meer Sadiq Hussain v. The State of Andhra Pradesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arikatla Venkataramana Vs K.V.N. Chakradhar Babu, IAS

G. Ramesh Raju Vs G.K.Dwivedi

M/s. V.S. Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Vs Smt. N. Madhavi Sukanya

N.Sudhakar Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Yaladandla Chand Basha Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh

Thota SeshagiriRao Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh