1 2025:CGHC:25788 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 1880 of 2025 Hetan Singh Gond S/o Pakshu Gond Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Bachratola, Post- Cholna Police Station- Anuppur, Tehsil- Jaithari District- Anuppur (M.P.) (Appellant) ... Petitioner versus Vikash Singh Rathore S/o Jeewan Singh Rathore Aged About 24 Years R/o Village- Bacharwar Tehsil And Police Station Pendra, District Gorella-Pendra-Marwahi (C.G.) (Complainant) ... Respondent For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Advocate For Respondent : (Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Order on Board 19/06/2025 1. This petition u/s 528 of the BNSS, 2023 is filed against the impugned order dated 14.05.2025 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road, District Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No.21/2025 (Heetan Singh Gond Vs. Vikash Singh Rathore) whereby the application filed by the petitioner for grant of extension of time to A ANNAJEE RAO Digitally signed by A ANNAJEE RAO Date: 2025.06.20 16:39:07 +0530 2 deposit 20% of the fine amount in the form of CCD as directed by the appellate Court has been rejected. 2. The JMFC, Pendra Road, took cognizance of the complaint case filed u/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881. According to the complainant, he is proprietor of Swaraj Tractor Agency where the petitioner had purchased a Tractor for a price of Rs.6,75,000/-, out of which, Rs.4,15,000/- was financed, Rs. 10,000/- was given by him in cash and further in exchange of his old tractor, Rs.1,00,000/- was adjusted in the sale price and for the balance amount of Rs.1,50,000/- the accused/petitioner gave a cheque in favour of the complainant, which on presentation in the Bank was dishonored due to insufficient funds. Thereafter, the complaint was filed and the learned JMFC after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence on record passed the judgment whereby the petitioner was convicted for the aforesaid offence and sentenced to undergo SI for 4 months and to pay the amount of Rs,1,60,000/- shown in the cheque, against which, the petitioner filed appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pendra Road. 3. In appeal, the learned appellate Court was pleased to suspend the sentence u/s 430(1) of BNSS 2023 by order dated 24.03.2025 and further stayed the sentence order subject to petitioner’s depositing 20% of the fine amount of Rs.1,60,000/- in the form of CCD within 30 days and on producing the receipt. The petitioner could not deposit the amount and filed application seeking extension of time to deposit the 20% of fine amount i.e., Rs.32,000/- on the ground that his grand- father 3 has died on 18.04.2025, hence he could not comply with the order of the appellate Court but the appellate Court had rejected the application for extension of time. Hence this petition before this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned appellate Court has not properly looked into the fact that due to death of grand father of the petitioner, the petitioner could not deposit the amount and it has rejected the application for extension of additional time , therefore, the impugned order of the appellate court dated 14.05.2025 is unjust and illegal and cannot be sustained. 5. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts and circumstances of the case and further as per sub-section (2) of Section 148 of the NI Act, the first opportunity should be 60 days from the date of the order for depositing such sum, I am of the opinion that it would be appropriate to grant further time to the petitioner. Therefore, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 14.05.2025 and allow this petition. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is directed to deposit the 20% of the amount shown in the dishonoured cheque within a period of 3 weeks from today. 6. In view of the above observation/direction, this petition stands finally disposed off at the admission stage itself. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Rao Judge