Allowed

Changan Lal v. State and Anr.

Rajasthan HC10 Feb 2012CRLMP/206/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged an order requiring the petitioner to deposit Rs. 1,77,625/- for suspending sentence. The court modified the condition to allow an interim deposit of Rs. 50,000/- and directed expedited disposal of the appeal within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; impugned order modified directing deposit of Rs. 50,000/- instead of Rs. 1,77,625/-; appeal to be disposed of within 15 days.

Changan Lal Vs State and Anr. — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 206/2012 (Changan Lal Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Anr.)

¶3

DATE OF ORDER : 10.02.2012

¶4

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

¶5

Mr. Mukhtar Khan, for the petitioner. Mr. Ashok Prajapat, Public Prosecutor. Mr. Manish Sisodia, for the respondent No.2.

¶6

The present misc. petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner challenging the order dated 11.01.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh, whereby, whilst allowing the application under Section 389 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner subsequent to his conviction as recorded by the learned Addl. Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chittorgarh in Regular Criminal Case No.322/2006, he has directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.1,77,625/- for suspending his sentences.

¶7

Learned counsel submits that in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dilip S. Dahanukar Vs. Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. & Anr., reported in 2007 Cr.L.R. (SC) 462, the condition to deposit the whole of the cheque amount while suspending the sentences in an appeal virtually amounts to denial of the right to appeal. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- in the interim but the direction to deposit the whole of the cheque amount is not reasonable.

¶8

Learned counsel for the complainant does not object to the modification of the said condition subject to the petitioner deposits a sum of Rs.50,000/- in the interim but he prays that the learned Appellate court be directed to decide the appeal expeditiously. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not object to this suggestion.

¶9

¶10

Resultantly, this misc. petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 11.01.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh in Criminal Appeal No.09/2012 is modified and now the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- before the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh instead of the amount of Rs.1,77,625/- as directed by the impugned order and thereafter the sentences awarded to the petitioner shall remain suspended as directed by the impugned order. The amount of Rs.50,000/shall be disbursed to the complainant respondent No.2 subject to his submitting an undertaking that in the event of the success of the appeal, he shall refund the said amount to the petitioner.

¶11

It is further directed that the appeal filed by the petitioner shall also be disposed of within a period of fifteen days from the date fixed for hearing of the appeal i.e. 18.04.2012.

¶12

(SANDEEP MEHTA), J.

¶13

ms rathore

Changan Lal v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Changan Lal v. State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Spring Stone Pvt.Ltd. Vs State and Ors.

Smt.Amrata Devi Vs State and Anr.

Saddam @ Lala Vs State

Mahesh Kumar Vs State

Harnek Singh and Ors. Vs State and Anr.

Bhaga Ram Vs State