Petitioner challenged an order requiring deposit of 20% of fine pending appeal. Court accepted petitioner's undertaking to deposit within 60 days and extended time without examining merits.
Time to deposit Rs.34,00,000/ extended by 60 days from date of order.
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.
NISHA Digitally signed byNISHA SANDEEP SANDEEP CHITNIS Date: 2021.08.17 CHITNIS 16:41:47 +0530
35-wp.2710.2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2710 OF 2021
Pratik Developers Through its proprietor Pritam Babanrao Dherange ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents
Mr. Hitesh P. Shah, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Pritam Babanrao Dherange, Petitioner in-person.
Mr. A. R. Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent No.1– State.
Mr. Murlidhar B. Kale, for the Respondent No.2.
CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
DATE : 10th AUGUST, 2021
P.C. :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
1/4
35-wp.2710.2021.doc
2/4
35-wp.2710.2021.doc
under Section punishable under 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and was directed to deposit compensation amount of Rs.1,70,00,000/-. Being aggrieved by the said Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed an Appeal in the Sessions Court being Criminal Appeal No.5 of 2021 along with an application seeking suspension of his sentence. The relevant part of said order dated 10th May 2021 reads thus:-
So, as per Sec. 148 of N.I. Act, appellant is directed to deposit 20% of fine amount i.e. 34,00,000/0 (20% of 1,70,00,000/-) within 60 days from today. If the said amount of Rs.34,00,000/- is deposited in this Court then only the impugned judgment is suspended by this order till decision of appeal & not otherwise. Appeal is admitted.”
3/4
35-wp.2710.2021.doc
REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the order directing deposit of 20% of fine under Section 148 NI Act requires judicial interference.
Whether the petitioner's undertaking to deposit the amount warrants extension of time.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pratik Developers Through its proprietor Pritam Babanrao Dherange
The State of Maharashtra
Respondent No.2
Revati Mohite Dere
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
