HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10034 of 2025 Court No. - 13 HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J. 1. Heard Shri Rohit Mishra and Shri Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following main relief(s):- "(1) QUASH the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 11.07.2025 passed by the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. II. Rae Bareli, in Complaint Case No.278 of 2013 (Ritesh Singh vs. Srichandra Bajpai). (II) QUASH the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 and subsequent order dated 08.09.2025 passed by the Leamed District & Sessions Judge, Rae Bareli, in Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2025 (Srichandra Bajpai vs. Ritesh Singh and Anr.), to the extent it imposes the condition of depositing 20% of the fine amount. (III) ALTERNATIVELY, SUSPEND the sentence of the applicant imposed vide order dated 11.07.2025 during the pendency of Criminal Appeal No.46 of 2025, and release the applicant on bail on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, without the condition-of-depositing 20% of the fine amount." 3. On being confronted, the learned counsel for the applicant says that he may be permitted to delete the prayer Nos. (I) and (III) during course of the day. 4. The same has not been opposed by learned A.G.A. 5. Accordingly, learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to delete the prayer Nos. (I) and (III), indicated above, during the course of the day. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rohit Mishra, Nishant Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Srichandra Bajpai .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 6. In view of the order proposed to be passed, notice to the opposite party No.2 is dispensed with. 7. This court considered the facts of the case as also the prayer sought in the present application. The prayer sought in the present application is extracted herein under :- "(II) QUASH the impugned order dated 08.08.2025 and subsequent order dated 08.09.2025 passed by the Leamed District & Sessions Judge, Rae Bareli, in Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2025 (Srichandra Bajpai vs. Ritesh Singh and Anr.), to the extent it imposes the condition of depositing 20% of the fine amount." 8. This court also considered the judgment dated 11.07.2025, passed by the IInd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raebareli (in short "Magistrate") in Complaint Case No.278/2013 (Ritesh Singh Vs. Sri Chandra Bajpayi), in terms of which the applicant, aged about 62 years, is under obligation to deposit Rs.8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight Lakhs only). 9. This Court also considered the facts as pleaded, which are to the effect that the applicant, aged about 62 years, on account of financial crunch is not in a position to deposit 20% of the amount of fine in terms of the order dated 08.08.2025, passed by the Session Judge, Raebareli (in short "appellate court") in Criminal Appeal No.46 of 2025 (Sri Chandra Bajpayi Vs. Ritesh Singh), whereby the appellate court has enlarged the appellant on bail subject to depositing 20% amount of the fine imposed by the Magistrate. 10. Taking note of the aforesaid as also the observation(s) made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. & others, Neutral Citation : 2023INSC822 and Muskan Enterprises & Anr. Vs. The State of Punjab & Anr., Neutral Citation : 2024 INSC 1046, this court finds that justice would suffice if liberty is given to the applicant to prefer an application before the appellate court concerned in the light of the observation (s) made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments referred above, which shall be decided as per law. 11. In view of the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of, without observing on the merits of the case, with liberty to the applicant to prefer an application before the appellate court concerned seeking benefit of the judgments referred above, which shall be decided within three weeks from today as per law by reasoned and speaking order. 12. During aforesaid period, the appellant shall not be taken into custody. November 26, 2025 ML/- A482 No. 10034 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Lavania,J.) Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench