Preethiloshini vs R.Balakrishnan

Court
Madras High Court

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 14-10-2026
Pronounced on : 16-10.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
CRL OP(MD) No. 23106 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011401072026}
and
CRL OP(MD) No. 23107 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011401092026}
and
CRL MP(MD) No. 21945 of 2026
Preethiloshini
W/o.S.Balagopal,
D.No.19, Muthoorani South,
Karaikudi Taluk,
Sivagangai District. ..Petitioner in both petitions
Vs
R.Balakrishnan
S/o.Rangasamy Moopanar
Rep through his Power Agent,
Gnanasekaran,
S/o.Arunachalam,
No.30,N.Pudur,
Chellappan Street,Karaikudi Taluk,
Sivagangai District. ..Respondent in both petitions
PRAYER in Crl.OP(MD).No.23106 of 2026: C-45S.To set aside and
modify the condition imposed on the petitioner for deposit of 20 percent
of the cheque amount made by the Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai
in Crl.MP.No.1968 of 2026 in Crl.A.No.91 of 2026 dated 25.08.2026.
__________
Page  1  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
PRAYER in Crl.OP(MD).No.23107 of 2026: C-45S.To set aside and
modify the condition imposed on the petitioner for deposit of 20 percent
of the cheque amount made by the Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai
in Crl.MP.No.2385 of 2026 in Crl.A.No.91 of 2026 dated 15.09.2026.
For Petitioner: Mr.K.Mahendra Prabhu
In both petitions
COMMON ORDER
The petitioner, who is the appellant in Crl.A.No.91 of 2026
pending on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai,
has come forward with these two Criminal Original Petitions, assailing
the order dated 25.08.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.1968 of 2026 and the
order dated 15.09.2026 made in Crl.M.P.No.2385 of 2026. Since the issue
involved in both the petitions is one and the same, they were taken up
together and are disposed of by this common order.
2.The facts, shorn of unnecessary details, are as follows:
(i).On a complaint preferred under Sections 138 and 142 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, the petitioner came to be convicted in
C.C.No.50 of 2024 by judgment dated 30.06.2026. She was sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and was further
directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation to the
complainant within one month, the cheque amount being Rs.3,00,000/-.
__________
Page  2  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
In default of payment of compensation, she was directed to undergo
simple imprisonment for a further period of one week.
3.Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the
petitioner preferred Crl.A.No.91 of 2026 before the learned Principal
Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, and along with the appeal, moved
Crl.M.P.No.1968 of 2026 under Section 430(1) of BNSS seeking
suspension of sentence. By order dated 25.08.2026, the Appellate Court
suspended the sentence on condition that the petitioner shall execute a
bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties each for a like sum to the
satisfaction of the trial Court, and on the further condition that she shall
deposit 20% of the cheque amount within a period of 30 days from the
date of the order.
4.Thereafter, the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.2385 of 2026 on
01.09.2026, praying to modify / relax the condition imposed in the order
dated 25.08.2026 by dispensing with the requirement of depositing 20%
of the cheque amount. The said petition came to be dismissed by order
dated 15.09.2026.
5.It is the condition of deposit of 20% of the cheque amount
imposed in the order dated 25.08.2026 in Crl.M.P.No.1968 of 2026, and
the refusal to relax the same by order dated 15.09.2026 in
Crl.M.P.No.2385 of 2026, that are under challenge in these petitions.
__________
Page  3  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
6.In support of his submissions, the learned counsel for the
petitioner placed reliance upon the following decisions:
(i) The order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in
2023 INSC 822 ( Jamboo Bhandari Vs.M.P.State Industrial
Development Corporation Ltd., & Ors)
(ii)The order of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.947 of 2024
dated 22.01.2024 (C.R.Balasubramanian Vs.P.Eswaramoorthi)
(iii)The order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated
19.12.2024 ( Muskan Enterprises Vs.The State of Punjab)
reported in 2024 INSC 1046;
7.Placing reliance on the above decisions, the learned counsel for
the petitioner submitted that the Appellate Court ought not to have
mechanically imposed a condition to deposit 20% of the cheque amount,
without adverting to the grounds raised by the petitioner and the peculiar
facts and circumstances of the case brought to its notice. He therefore
prayed that both the impugned orders, insofar as they direct the deposit of
20% of the cheque amount, may be set aside.
8.The learned counsel further submitted that when the petitioner
has made out a prima facie case for suspension of sentence, imposing a
precondition to deposit 20% of the cheque amount is onerous and is not
sustainable in law.
__________
Page  4  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
9.This Court has heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and carefully perused the materials available on record.
10.The issue as to whether the deposit under Section 148 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act can be insisted upon as a matter of course is
no longer res integra. This Court, in its judgment reported in
2024:MHC:5897 dated 22.01.2024 in Crl.O.P.No.947 of 2024
(C.R.Balasubramanian Vs. P.Eswaramoorthi), has observed as follows:
“ Before drawing the curtains in this case, this Court
thought it fit to bring to the notice of the District Judiciary the
above two judgments,particularly, the judgment of the Apex
Court. While dealing with an application for suspension of
sentence or for grant of bail when an appeal is filed against the
conviction for offence u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
the Courts must not mechanically impose a condition of  deposit
of 20% of the compensation amount/cheque amount u/s.148 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act. When any ground has been
raised by the appellant for reducing the percentage or for
exempting the deposit of  such amount, it has to be dealt with by
the appellate Court and a reasoned order must be passed if the
Court wants to direct the appellant to deposit 20% of the
compensation amount/cheque amount. A copy of this order shall
be circulated to all the Principal District Courts across the State
of Tamil Nadu.”
 
__________
Page  5  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
11.A perusal of the grounds of appeal in Crl.A.No.91 of 2026
shows that the petitioner has raised several grounds and has specifically
sought exemption from depositing the cheque amount / compensation
amount. However, neither in the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.1968 of 2026
nor in the order passed in Crl.M.P.No.2385 of 2026 has the Appellate
Court considered those grounds. In the order dated 15.09.2026, the
Appellate Court has merely observed that no satisfactory reason has been
assigned by the petitioner for relaxing the condition. It is thus evident that
the Appellate Court has not applied its mind to the grounds raised by the
petitioner. The impugned orders, therefore, run contrary to the dictum laid
down above, and this Court is inclined to remit the matter back to the
Appellate Court to consider afresh the plea of the petitioner seeking
exemption from depositing 20% of the amount.
12.The Appellate Court shall consider the grounds raised by the
petitioner and pass appropriate orders on its own merits and in
accordance with law.
13.In the result, this Court passes the following order:
(a)The order dated 25.08.2026 passed in
Crl.M.P.No.1968 of 2026 is set aside insofar as it imposes a
condition to deposit 20% of the cheque amount;
__________
Page  6  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
(b)The order dated 15.09.2026 passed in
Crl.M.P.No.2385 of 2026 in Crl.A.No.91 of 2026 on the file of
the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, is set aside;
(c)Crl.M.P.No.2385 of 2026 is remitted back to the file
of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Sivagangai, for fresh
consideration on merits, and the same shall be disposed of
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order;
(d)Both the Criminal Original Petitions are allowed to
the extent indicated above. Consequently, the connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
16-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
msa
To
The Principal Sessions Judge
Sivagangai
__________
Page  7  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.
msa
CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
AND
CRL MP(MD) No. 21945 of 2026
16-10-2026
__________
Page  8  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )

CRL OP(MD) Nos. 23106 & 23107 of 2026
__________
Page  9  of  9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 16/10/2026 03:56:13 pm )