Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010096722025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/463/2025 MADAN BARO S/O- LATE LAKHI KANTA BARO R/O- VILLAGE- KAWOIMARI P.S- PATACHARKUCHI P.O.-DUBI DIST.-BAJALI ASSAM. PIN-781325 VERSUS SHRI PRATAP DAS AND ANR S/O- LATE KANDARPA DAS R/O- VILLAGE- BAMUNA P.O.-SUNDARIDILA P.S-BARPETA DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM. PIN-781314. 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM ------------ Advocate for : MR. N. K. RAY Advocate for : appearing for SHRI PRATAP DAS AND ANR Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 31.07.2025 Heard Mr. R. Phukan, learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner and Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party no. 2, State of Assam. 2. This interlocutory application is preferred by the applicant who is the petitioner in the connected revision petition, seeking suspension of execution on the sentence passed by the learned Trial Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta in N.I. Case no. 38/2021, which is subsequently affirmed by the Appellate Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barpeta in Criminal Appeal Case no. 23/2024. 3. The applicant-petitioner was the sole accused in the criminal proceeding in N.I. Case no. 38/2021 instituted by the respondent no. 1 herein as the complainant [‘the respondent no. 1-complainant’, for short] under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act [N.I. Act] in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta [‘the Trial Court’, for short]. After conclusion of the trial, the Trial Court had convicted the applicant-petitioner for the offence under Section 138, N.I. Act and he had been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 6,00,000/-, in default of payment of the fine amount, to undergo simple imprisonment for another two months. The complaint case, N.I. Case no. 38/2021 was with regard to dishonour of a cheque issued by the accused-petitioner in favour of the respondent no. 1-complainant for an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/-. When an Page No.# 3/4 appeal was preferred against the Judgment and Order of the Trial Court, the Appellate Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barpeta dismissed the criminal appeal, Criminal Appeal Case no. 23/2024 by a Judgment and Order dated 07.04.2025, thereby, affirming the Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Court. 4. Mr. Phukan, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that learned Trial Court as well as the learned Appellate Court failed to consider and appreciate the evidence adduced by the applicant-petitioner. 5. In the Judgment and Order of the Appellate Court, it is mentioned that in the interregnum, the accused-petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- out of the total amount of fine amount of Rs. 6,00,000/-. 6. Having regard to the projections made, this Court finds that the applicant- petitioner has made out a prima facie case for suspension of execution of the sentence passed against him and for his release on bail till disposal of the accompanying criminal revision petition. It is therefore, provided that subject to deposit of an amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- which is 20% of the remaining amount to be paid as fine by the applicant-petitioner within a period of 60 days from today before the Registry of this Court, the remaining part of the sentence passed against the applicant-petitioner shall remain suspended till the disposal of the accompanying criminal revision petition and the applicant-petitioner is allowed to remain on previous bail. JUDGE Page No.# 4/4 Comparing Assistant