Petitioner challenged suspension of sentence for dishonour of cheque where 50% fine deposit was mandated. High Court upheld Sessions Judge's discretion noting no perversity. Time for payment extended by six weeks.
Writ petition dismissed; time for payment extended by six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
abs
FARAD CONTINUATION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1667 OF 2009
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders
Mr. D.A. Patil i/b Mr. A.K. Suryawanshi for the petitioner.
Mr. S.V. Gajare, A.P.P. for the State.
CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, JJ.
DATE : 7TH NOVEMBER 2009
P.C. :
2
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the discretion of the Sessions Judge to direct deposit of 50% of fine for suspension of sentence pending appeal under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrum
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
State of Maharashtra
D.G. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
