Lalit Jangid Son of Shri Mohanlal Jangid, Vs Anil Kumar… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2026)

Lalit Jangid Son of Shri Mohanlal Jangid, Vs Anil Kumar… — Cheque Dishonour | Rajasthan HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The condition of depositing 20% of the compensation amount imposed upon the petitioner vide order dated 17.10.2025 is modified; the petitioner is now required to deposit only 10% of the cheque amount within one month from the date of this order, upon fulfilment of which he shall be entitled to release on bail, while all other conditions of the order dated 17.10.2025 remain intact.

Issue for consideration

Whether the condition imposed by the learned Appellate Court (deposit of 20% of the compensation amount) upon the petitioner, who pleaded financial hardship and inability to comply, should be relaxed or modified.

Court's answer

It is settled law that the imposition of a condition for deposit of 20% of the compensation amount is discretionary.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the petitioner's financial hardship and inability to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, the condition imposed in the order dated 17.10.2025 is modified: the petitioner shall deposit only 10% of the cheque amount instead of 20% of the compensation amount awarded by the trial Court, within a period of one month from the date of this order.

Key takeaways

Upon fulfilling the condition of depositing 10% of the cheque amount within the stipulated time, the petitioner shall be entitled to be released on bail.ratio¶20
The other conditions imposed in the order dated 17.10.2025 shall remain intact.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 266/2026, decided 06/03/2026 by Hon'ble Anil Kumar Upman, J. The petitioner, Lalit Jangid, convicted for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, had sought appellate-court indulgence through an application under Section 430 of BNSS before the Additional Session Judge No.1, Behror (Criminal Appeal No. 25/2025); while allowing that application vide order dated 17.10.2025, the Appellate Court conditioned him to deposit 20% of the compensation amount awarded by the trial Court. Pleading poverty and inability to pay, the petitioner sought relaxation before the High Court. Observing that imposition of the 20% deposit condition is discretionary, the Court modified the condition: the petitioner shall deposit only 10% of the cheque amount within one month from the date of the order, on fulfilment of which he shall be entitled to release on bail; all other conditions of the appellate court's order dated 17.10.2025 remain intact. The petition was accordingly partly allowed.

[2026:RJ-JP:9784]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 266/2026

Lalit Jangid Son Of Shri Mohanlal Jangid, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of F-70, Ambedkar Nagar, Currently Residing At F-246 Ambedkar Nagar, Alwar, District Alwar, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

Anil Kumar Garg Son Of Shri Hariram, Aged About 53 Years, Resident Of Bayana, District Bharatpur, Currently Residing At Behror, Dist. Alwar At Present District Kotputli- Behror, Rajasthan.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Rajendra Prasad Gautam,Adv.
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. VijaySingh Yadav,PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order

06/03/2026

By way of filing the present Criminal Misc. Petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 17.10.2025 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge No.1, Behror, District Alwar in Criminal Appeal No.25/2025.

Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are that after getting convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, the petitioner moved an appeal along with an application under Section 430 of BNSS, before the learned Appellate Court. While allowing the application under Section 430 of BNSS, the learned Appellate Court vide order dated 17.10.2025 imposed a condition upon the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount awarded by the trial Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a poor person and he does not have sufficient source

[2026:RJ-JP:9784]

[CRLMP-266/2026]

(2 of 2)

of income to even sustain himself. Learned counsel, thus, prayed that since the petitioner is facing financial crisis and is unable to satisfy the said condition of depositing 20% of the compensation amount, the said condition be relaxed.

Heard learned counsel for the parties at bar. Perused the material as made available to this Court. 5. It is settled law that the imposition of condition for deposition of 20% of the compensation amount is discretionary and thus keeping in view the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is facing financial hardship and is not in position to deposit 20% of the compensation amount awarded by the trial Court, this Court deems it appropriate to modify the aforementioned condition imposed in the order dated 17.10.2025. 6. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Misc. Petition is partly allowed. The condition of deposition of 20% of the compensation amount imposed upon the petitioner vide order dated 17.10.2025 is modified. Now, the petitioner would deposit only 10% of the cheque amount instead of 20% of the compensation amount as awarded by the learned trial Court within a period of one month from the date of this order. The petitioner, upon fulfilling the condition of deposition of 10% of the cheque amount within stipulated time shall be entitled to be released on bail. It is however made clear that the other conditions imposed in the order dated 17.10.2025 shall remain intact.

All pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

(ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J

MADAN MEENA /91