[2025:RJ-JP:21664] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 3085/2025 Pramod Kumar @ Sanjay S/o Shri Omprakash Sharma, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village Vijay Nagar (Bichla) Tehsil Mundawar District Alwar (Rajasthan). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Anil Kumar Gupta S/o Late Shri Banwari Lal Gupta, R/o 176 Green Park, Dadi Ka Phatak, Jhotwara, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T C Vyas For Respondent(s) : Mr. Manvendra Singh Shekhawat, PP with Mr. Rishi Raj Singh Rathore, PP HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 22/05/2025 Present petition is filed assailing the interim order dated 02.05.2025 passed by Additional District and Session Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan-II whereby the learned Appellate Court partly allowed the Suspension of Sentence (Stay) Appeal and imposed a condition that the accused appellant/petitioner herein shall deposit 20% cheque amount before the learned Trial Court. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. Upon doing the same, it is noted that learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to make out a case of financial distress or undue hardship, for which the petitioner might be in a place where deposition of the said amount would be impossible. Nevertheless, the application moved before the concerned Court was vague. This [2025:RJ-JP:21664] (2 of 2) [CRLMP-3085/2025] Court is of the view that as the matter pertains to Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 wherein categorical directions are spelled out in Section 148 and the learned Trial Court has rightly complied with the same. For the sake of convenience the relevant extract from the impugned order dated 02.05.2025 is reiterated herein below: “/kkjk 148 ijkdzE; fy[kr vf/kfu;e ds vuqlkj vihyh; U;k;ky; dks ;g vf/kdkj gS fd nks"kfl)h ds vkns’k ds fo#) izLrqr dh xbZ vihy esa] vihyh; U;k;ky; vihyk.V dks vf/kjksfir {kfriwfrZ jkf’k@tqekZus dh jkf’k dh U;wure 20 izfr’kr jkf’k tek djkus dk vkns’k ns ldrk gSA /kkjk 148 ijkdzE; fy[kr vf/kfu;e ds izko/kkuksa ds en~nsutj vihykFkhZ dks vknsf’kr fd;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr gksxk fd og bl vkns’k ds 60 fnol dh vof/k ds Hkhrj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk vf/kjksfir izfrdj jkf’k 1]77]000@& :i;s dh 20 izfr’kr jkf’k fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k tek djkosA lexz rF;ksa ,oa ifjfLFkr;ksa dks n`f"Vxr j[krs gq, ;fn vihykFkhZ ipkl gtkj :i;s dk eqpydk o iPphl&iPphl gtkj :i;s dh nks tekursa izLrqr dj fuEu 'krksZa lfgr rLnhd djk ys fd og bl vihyh; U;k;ky; ds le{k lquokbZ dh izR;sd fnukad dks mifLFkr gksrk jgsxk vkSj /kkjk 148 ijkdzE; fy[kr vf/kfu;e ds rgr vkns’kkuqlkj vf/kjksfir izfrdj dh jkf’k 1]77]000@& :i;s dh 20 izfr’kr jkf’k dk Mh-Mh-@is&vkWMZj] bl vkns’k ds 60 fnol dh vof/k ds Hkhrj] ifjoknh ds uke dk cuokdj tek djok ns] rks fo}ku v/khuLFk U;k;ky; fof’k"V egkuxj eftLVªsV ¼,u-vkbZ-,DV izdj.k½ dze& 08] t;iqj egkuxj f}rh; ds nkf.Md izdj.k la- 270@2023 vfuy dqekj xqIrk cuke izeksn dqekj esa fnukad 03-04-2025 dks ikfjr n.Mkns’k dh fdz;kfUorh rk&QSlyk vihy LFkfxr dh tkrh gSA” Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the present matter. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J DEEPAK/73