S PRAKASH vs B ANUP

Court
Karnataka High Court

- 1 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57319
CRL.P No. 5991 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010344602024





IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 12 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026


BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K


CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 5991 OF 2024

BETWEEN:


S PRAKASH
S/O SATHYANARAYAN
AGED ABOUT 59 YEARS
M/S SREE PRAVEEN MARKETING
RESIDING AT NO.403,
TH
14 MAIN ROAD,
RAGHAVENDRA NAGARA
MYSORE - 577 501
…PETITIONER
(BY SRI. JAGAN MOHAN M.T, ADVOCATE)

AND:

B ANUP
S/OLATE NARAYANADAS
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS
RESIDING AT 'SAMSKRITI'
MADAPPA COMPOUND
NEAR RANGAIAHNA BAGILU
CHITRADURGA - 577 501
…RESPONDENT
(BY SRI. MOUNSEHS S.B, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. V.B SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE)

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC PRAYING TO









Digitally signed
by PANKAJA S
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA

QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 22.03.2024 IN

- 2 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57319
CRL.P No. 5991 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010344602024



CRL.A.NO.35/2024 PASSED BY THE I ADDL.DISTRICT AND
SESSIONS JUDGE, CHITRADURGA BY IMPOSING THE
CONDITION TO DEPOSIT 20 % OF THE FINE AMOUNT BY THE
PETITIONER TO SUSPEND THE SENTENCE IN C.C.NO.508/2018
BEFORE PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM AT CHITRADURGA
AND MODIFY THE SAME TO DEPOSIT 10 % OF THE FINE
AMOUNT BY THE PETITIONER TO SUSPEND THE SENTENCE IN
C.C.NO.508/2018.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.03.2024
passed in Crl.A.No.35/2024 by the I Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Chitradurga (for short, 'the First Appellate
Court'), whereby the First Appellate Court has passed the
following order:
"The order of conviction and sentence passed
by the trial court in C.C.No.508/2018 is hereby
stayed till disposal of the appeal on condition
that 20% of total fine and compensation amount
shall be deposited before the Trial Court within

- 3 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57319
CRL.P No. 5991 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010344602024



60 days and he shall execute bail bond for
Rs.50,000/- with a surety for like sum.
Issue notice of order on suspension of
sentence, notice of IA and appeal to the
respondent.
Call for Trial Court records."

2. The factual matrix of the case is that the
respondent-complainant initiated proceedings against the
petitioner-accused for the offence punishable under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, the ‘N.I.
Act’). The petitioner-accused was convicted by the Principal
Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Chitradurga (for short, ‘the Trial
Court’), in C.C. No.508/2018, vide judgment dated 31.01.2024,
and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.5,10,000/-, with interest at
9% per annum from the date of the cheque till realization,
payable to the respondent-complainant. In default of payment
of the fine, the petitioner-accused was directed to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of six months. Aggrieved by
the said judgment, the petitioner preferred Crl.A. No.35/2024
before the First Appellate Court, along with an application

- 4 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57319
CRL.P No. 5991 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010344602024



under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of
sentence. The First Appellate Court, while allowing the
application for suspension of sentence, imposed the conditions
as stated in the impugned order. Aggrieved by the said order,
the petitioner-accused has approached this Court.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties.
4. The primary contention of learned counsel for the
petitioner is that the First Appellate Court erred in allowing the
application filed by the petitioner under Section 389 of Cr.P.C.,
subject to the condition of depositing 20% of the fine amount
imposed by the Trial Court. He contended that the said
condition is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex
JAMBOO BHANDARI V. M.P. STATE INDUSTRIAL
Court in
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. & ORS., reported in (2023)
10 SCC 446 . He further submitted that the petitioner had
produced the discharge summary and other medical documents
to demonstrate that he was suffering from serious ailments and
was unable to deposit 20% of the fine amount. However,
without considering the said circumstances, the First Appellate

- 5 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57319
CRL.P No. 5991 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010344602024



Court passed the impugned order. Accordingly, he prays to
allow the petition.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent
opposed the prayer of the petitioner, contending that the First
Appellate Court was justified in directing the petitioner to
deposit 20% of the fine amount and that the impugned order is
reasonable. He further submitted that, in view of the settled
position of law under the provisions of the N.I. Act, a blanket
order of suspension cannot be granted. Accordingly, he
contended that the First Appellate Court was justified in passing
the impugned order and sought to dismiss the petition.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to the
submission made by the learned counsel for the respective
parties so also perused the entire documents on record.
7. As could be gathered from the records, the
petitioner was convicted by the Trial Court for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced to
pay a fine of Rs.5,10,000/-, with interest at 9% per annum
from the date of cheque till realization. The First Appellate

- 6 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57319
CRL.P No. 5991 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010344602024



Court suspended the sentence subject to the condition that the
petitioner shall deposit 20% of the fine amount imposed by the
Trial Court within sixty days. I find no error in the said order.
However, having regard to the ailments suffered by the
petitioner and the medical certificates produced before this
Court, in the interest of justice, I am of the considered view
that the impugned order requires modification.
8. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit
10% of the fine amount before the Trial Court within two weeks
from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Upon
such deposit, the sentence shall stand suspended, subject to
compliance with the other conditions imposed by the First
Appellate Court regarding execution of the bond and furnishing
of surety.
9. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of .
10. Considering that the transaction is of the year
2016, the First Appellate Court is directed to dispose of the
appeal within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of
production of certified copy of this order. Both parties shall

- 7 -
HC-KAR
NC: 2026:KHC:57319
CRL.P No. 5991 of 2024


CNR: KAHC010344602024



cooperate with the First Appellate Court in expeditious disposal
of the appeal and shall not seek any adjournment for
arguments.


SD/-
(RAJESH RAI K)
JUDGE







CR
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 27