Partly allowed

Popat Lal v. Arvind

Rajasthan HC17 Oct 2023CRLMP/5761/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur, in a miscellaneous petition challenging an appellate order to deposit 20% of compensation, modified the requirement to 20% of the cheque amount as a condition for sentence suspension pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order directing deposit of 20% of compensation/fine is modified; petitioner directed to deposit 20% of cheque amount instead.

Popat Lal Vs Arvind — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:35557]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 5761/2023

¶4

Popat Lal S/o Chunni Lal, Aged About 48 Years, R/o- Jhonthri, Police Station Dhambola, District Dungarpur (Raj.).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Arvind S/o Shri Nathji Kalal, R/o Jhonthari, Police Station Dhambola, District Dungarpur (Raj.)

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. JVS Deora For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, P.P.

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

¶11

Order

¶12

17/10/2023

¶13

The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 18.07.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Dungarpur in Criminal Appeal No.64/2023 whereby the appellate court while suspending the sentence for offence under Section 138 N.I. Act pending appeal, has directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.2,00,000/- i.e. 20% of the compensation/fine amount of Rs.3,00,000/- awarded by the trial court.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the appellate court has ordered to pay 20% of the compensation amount imposed by the trial court while suspending the sentence of the petitioner. The petitioner is a poor person and he is ready to deposit 20% of the cheque amount. He prays that the order passed by learned appellate court may be modified to the extent the learned Judge has directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount.

[2023:RJ-JD:35557]

[CRLMP-5761/2023]

(2 of 2)

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer of the petitioner.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order.

¶20

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, the impugned order date 18.07.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dungarpur is modified and the petitioner is directed to deposit 20% of the cheque amount as a condition precedent to suspension of sentence pending appeal instead of 20% of the compensation amount, within a period of one month from today.

¶21

The misc. petition is disposed of accordingly. Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶22

(KULDEEP MATHUR),J

¶23

234-Ravi Khandelwal

Popat Lal v. Arvind

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Popat Lal v. Arvind

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Aslam Vs State of Rajasthan

Deep Bhanushali Vs State of Rajasthan

Angrez Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohindra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Deepak Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Jetharam Vs State of Rajasthan