Mr Dodda Ravi Kumar Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

MR DODDA RAVI KUMAR, S/O. NAGESWARA RAO, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O. FLAT NO. 501, SRI VINAYAKA TOWERS, 7TH LINE, CURRENCY NAGAR, VIJAYAWADA-8.

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH, AT AMARAVATHI.

¶14

DONGA RAMACHANDRASEKHAR, S/O. D.V.V SATYA NARAYANA, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, BUSINESS, R/O. D.NO 3-103, KOTTAVARI MARKA, LAKSHAMANESWARAM VILLAGE, NARASAPURAM, WEST GODAVARI, AP- 534 275.

¶15

...RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶17

1.VENKATA SIVA NAGARAJ BONKURI

¶18

Counsel for the Respondent(S):

¶19

1.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶20

2.JYOTHI TAMMINA

¶21

The Court made the following:

¶22

ORDER :

¶23

The Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 438 and 442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, ‘the BNSS’), challenging the order dated 18.05.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.281 of 2026 in Crl.A.No.84 of 2026 on the file of the learned X Additional District Judge, West Godavari at Narsapur, whereby the learned Appellate Court directed the petitioner/accused to deposit 20% of the cheque amount as a condition for suspension of sentence.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor.

¶25

Issuance of notice to Respondent No.2 is not necessary, as the challenge in the present revision is confined to the condition directing deposit of 20% of the cheque amount.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and preferred the above criminal appeal. It is contended that the petitioner is aged about 54 years and is suffering from several ailments. It is further submitted that his financial condition is crippled, he is unable to earn sufficiently to comply with the condition imposed by the learned Appellate Court, and that he is a white ration card holder. Therefore, it is prayed that the condition requiring deposit of 20% of the cheque amount may be suitably modified.

¶27

In this regard, it is apposite to refer to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. SIDC Ltd¹ . , wherein it has been held that, in exceptional circumstances, the Appellate Court may suspend the sentence without insisting upon deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation/cheque amount or may suitably modify such condition depending upon the facts of the case.

¶28

Accordingly, the order dated 18.05.2026 passed in Crl.M.P.No.281 of 2026 in Crl.A.No.84 of 2026 on the file of the learned X Additional District Judge, West Godavari at Narsapur is modified. The petitioner is directed to deposit 12% of the cheque amount within a period of four (04) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶29

On such deposit, Respondent No.2 is at liberty to withdraw the said amount upon furnishing sufficient sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. In the event of failure on the part of the petitioner to deposit the said amount within the stipulated period, the learned Trial Court/Appellate Court shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

¶30