Jamuna Ray Vs Manimala Das

The instant interlocutory application is preferred seeking suspension of the execution of the sentence passed against the applicant-petitioner and for her release on bail.

¶19

The applicant as the petitioner preferred the criminal revision petition under Section 438 read with Section 442, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023 against a Judgment and Order dated 16.06.2025 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Chirang at Kajalgaon [‘the Appellate Court’] in Criminal Appeal Case no. 20/2025 whereby the

¶20

Page No. 2/3

¶21

Appellate Court while partly allowing the appeal preferred by the applicant-petitioner herein modifying the sentence part, has affirmed a Judgment and Order dated 08.04.2025 passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chirang, Kajalgaon [‘the Trial Court’] in NICR Case no. 13/2022 in so far as the conviction of the applicant-petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is concerned.

¶22

The Trial Court after holding the applicant-petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act, had sentenced the applicant-petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 12,00,000/- as fine to the complainant and, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The Appellate Court while affirming the conviction, has interfered with the sentence for payment of the fine amount Rs. 12,00,000/- by reducing it to Rs. 9,00,000/-, without interfering with the default stipulation.

¶23

The Appellate Court while disposing the criminal appeal, has directed the applicantpetitioner to surrender before the Trial Court to serve out the sentence while recording that no money has been paid to the complainant by the applicant-petitioner during the pendency of the appeal. In deference to the said Judgment of the Appellate Court, the Trial Court has, on 23.06.2025, ordered for issuance of Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest to the applicantpetitioner as the convict.

¶24

The applicant-petitioner herein also sought interference with the said Order dated 23.06.2025.

¶25

The provisions contained in Section 148 of the NI Act has provided for the power of the Appellate Court to order payment pending appeal against the conviction.

¶26

In this application, the applicant-petitioner has averred that she is an Assistant Professor of Birjhora Kanya Mahavidyalaya, Bongaigaon and due to the NBWA issued against the Trial Court, the applicant-petitioner’s reputation is harmed. Thus, it is not possible to infer that the applicant does not have means to pay in view of her service career as an Assistant Professor in a college.

¶27

Page No. 3/3

¶28

Having regard to the provisions contained in Section 148 of the NI Act and the concurrent findings of facts recorded by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court, this Court is of the considered view that the prayer for suspension of execution of the sentence passed against the applicant can be made subject to deposit of 20% of the fine amount awarded as part of sentence by the Trial Court and affirmed by the Appellate Court. It is, therefore, ordered that the remaining part of the sentence passed by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court shall remain in abeyance till the disposal of the accompanying revision petition, which has been admitted today for hearing, subject to deposit of 20% of the fine amount of Rs. 9,00,000/- awarded by the Trial Court and affirmed by the Appellate Court, that is, Rs. 1,80,000/- before the Registry within a period of 30 [thirty] days from today.

¶29

It is further ordered that during the period of thirty days, which has been granted to the applicant to deposit the afore-stated amount, the NBWA issued by the Trial Court by Order dated 23.06.2025 shall remain in abeyance.

¶30

The instant application is disposed of with the afore-said terms.

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Comparing Assistant

Jamuna Ray v. Manimala Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamuna Ray v. Manimala Das

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabin Paul @ Probin Paul Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Rukiya Bibi Vs the State of Assam

Abdul Jabbar and Anr. Vs Farida Yasmin

Smritikana Paul Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Asasa International Mining Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Rajesh Barua Vs the State of Assam