CRM-M-18494- 165 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Pawanjit Singh State of Punjab and Another CORAM : HON'BLE M Present: Ms. Gagandeep Kaur AMAN CHAUDHARY 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, for quashing the order dated Sessions Judge, 20% of the compensation amou 2. Learned counsel submits that sentence of the petitioner, aged was suspended, vide the aforesaid order dated deposit 20% of the compensation amount within a period of 60 days from the date of said order. The imposition of such stringent and onerous condition is unjust. He prays that the same are liable to be quashed on account of his fami and poor financial status. 3. Heard 4. Reference is made to the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs. MP State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. 2023(10) SCC 446 -2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : VERSUS and Another HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Ms. Gagandeep Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- AMAN CHAUDHARY J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, for quashing the order dated 11.02.2026, Annexure P Sessions Judge, Sangrur, vide which the petitioner has been directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount in 60 days. Learned counsel submits that sentence of the petitioner, aged was suspended, vide the aforesaid order dated deposit 20% of the compensation amount within a period of 60 days from the date of said order. The imposition of such stringent and onerous condition is unjust. He prays that the same are liable to be quashed on account of his fami and poor financial status. Heard Reference is made to the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs. MP State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. 2023(10) SCC 446, the relevant paras whereof reads thus: -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18494-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 06.04.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondents AMAN CHAUDHARY , Advocate for the petitioner. The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, for , Annexure P-2, passed by learned Additional , vide which the petitioner has been directed to deposit Learned counsel submits that sentence of the petitioner, aged 66 years, was suspended, vide the aforesaid order dated 11.02.2026, but he was directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within a period of 60 days from the date of said order. The imposition of such stringent and onerous condition is unjust. He prays that the same are liable to be quashed on account of his family exigencies Reference is made to the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs. MP State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. , the relevant paras whereof reads thus: The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, for Additional , vide which the petitioner has been directed to deposit years, , but he was directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount within a period of 60 days from the date of said order. The imposition of such stringent and onerous condition is unjust. He ly exigencies Reference is made to the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs. MP State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.04.07 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-18494- “6. W should be made of Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Hence, normally, Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the App Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can be made for the reasons specifically recorded. 7. Therefore, when Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusi must be recorded 5. In SCConline SC 4107 Sessions Court to re “Whether sufficient ground has been made out by the appellants to persuade the Sessions Court not to order any deposit is l satisfaction. We do not express any opinion on the plea that the appellants have sought to advance before us, lest any party seeks to derive any advantage. All points are left open.” -2026 (O&M) “6. What is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Hence, normally, Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the App Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can be made for the reasons specifically recorded. 7. Therefore, when Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusi must be recorded.” In Muskan Enterprises and another vs. State of Punjab 2024 SCConline SC 4107, Hon’ble the Supreme Court remitted the matter to the Sessions Court to re-examine the issue of ordering deposit by observing that, “Whether sufficient ground has been made out by the appellants to persuade the Sessions Court not to order any deposit is l satisfaction. We do not express any opinion on the plea that the appellants have sought to advance before us, lest any party seeks to derive any advantage. All points are left open.” -2- hat is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Hence, normally, Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the Appellate Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can be made for the reasons Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusi Muskan Enterprises and another vs. State of Punjab 2024 , Hon’ble the Supreme Court remitted the matter to the examine the issue of ordering deposit by observing that, “Whether sufficient ground has been made out by the appellants to persuade the Sessions Court not to order any deposit is left entirely to its discretion and satisfaction. We do not express any opinion on the plea that the appellants have sought to advance before us, lest any party seeks to derive any advantage. All hat is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Hence, normally, Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit ellate Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit of 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception can be made for the reasons Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusion Muskan Enterprises and another vs. State of Punjab 2024 , Hon’ble the Supreme Court remitted the matter to the examine the issue of ordering deposit by observing that, “Whether sufficient ground has been made out by the appellants to persuade the eft entirely to its discretion and satisfaction. We do not express any opinion on the plea that the appellants have sought to advance before us, lest any party seeks to derive any advantage. All TRIPTI SAINI 2026.04.07 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-18494- 6. In light of the aforesaid, the c compensation amount vide order dated learned Additional Court to reconsider the matter afresh, as per the observations made judgments, granting an opportunity to the petitioner. 7. Till the decision is taken, sentence of the petitioner shall remain suspended. The petitioner is directed to appear through his counsel before the learned Appellate Court on or be stand vacated automatically. 8. The petition is disposed of accordingly. 9. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. April 06, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable -2026 (O&M) In light of the aforesaid, the condition imposed to deposit 20% of compensation amount vide order dated 11.02.2026 Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, is set aside. The learned Court to reconsider the matter afresh, as per the observations made judgments, granting an opportunity to the petitioner. Till the decision is taken, sentence of the petitioner shall remain suspended. The petitioner is directed to appear through his counsel before the learned Appellate Court on or before 08.04.2026, failing which, this order shall stand vacated automatically. The petition is disposed of accordingly. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -3- ondition imposed to deposit 20% of 11.02.2026, Annexure P-2, passed by , is set aside. The learned Appellate Court to reconsider the matter afresh, as per the observations made in the aforesaid judgments, granting an opportunity to the petitioner. Till the decision is taken, sentence of the petitioner shall remain suspended. The petitioner is directed to appear through his counsel before the fore 08.04.2026, failing which, this order shall The petition is disposed of accordingly. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE ondition imposed to deposit 20% of 2, passed by Appellate in the aforesaid Till the decision is taken, sentence of the petitioner shall remain suspended. The petitioner is directed to appear through his counsel before the fore 08.04.2026, failing which, this order shall All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.04.07 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document