HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.263/2025 IN S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No.1177/2025 Jairam Pipalva Son Of Sitaram Pipalva, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward No. 01, Shiv Colony, Churu, Rajasthan. (Presently Confined In District Jail Sikar) ----Petitioner Versus Parmeshwarlal Nagori S/o Arjunlal Nagori, R/o Ward No. 11, Oswalo Ka Mohalla, Fatehpur Shekhawati, District Sikar, Rajasthan. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravindra Kumar Paliwal, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order 15/07/2025 Heard on the application for suspension of sentence. The revision petition has been filed against the order dated 07.04.2022 passed by the learned trial Court in Regular Criminal Case No.23/2016, whereby, the accused-petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced to undergo 1 year of Simple Imprisonment (S.I.) along with fine of Rs.6,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 3 months additional S.I. An appeal was preferred by the accused against the said order which was dismissed by the learned appellate Court while affirming/modifying the order of the learned trial Court. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner was on bail during trial and presently he is behind bars for three and a half months and his financial position is not sound. However, he is ready to deposit the amount as ordered by this Court. I have perused the relevant provisions of law. (2 of 2) [SOSR-263/2025 in CRLR- 1177/2025] Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 provides that in an appeal by drawer against conviction under Section 138, the appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of twenty percent of the fine or compensation awarded by the learned trial Court. Thus, it is clear that in appropriate cases, this amount can be more than 20%. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this application for suspension of sentence is allowed. The sentence of the accused-applicant namely, Jairam Pipalva S/o Sitaram Pipalva is suspended till final disposal of the revision petition, provided he deposits a sum of Rs.60,000/- by way of Demand Draft in the name of complainant in the learned trial Court and also furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before this Court on 19th August, 2025 and thereafter as and when called upon to do so. It is also ordered that the original Demand Draft shall be delivered to the complainant subject to an undertaking to be furnished by the complainant in the learned trial court to the effect that in case the revision petition is decided against him, he will refund the aforesaid amount along with interest @7% per annum. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for compliance. (UMA SHANKER VYAS),J DANISH USMANI /53