1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.10 of 2025 Date of Decision : 06.01.2025 Sandeep Kumar …… Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others ……Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Servedaman Rathore, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. B.N. Sharma, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1/State. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) Notice, at this stage, issued to respondent No.1 only. Mr. B.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.1. 2. The present petition has been filed seeking 2 months’ further time to deposit 20% of the compensation amount as directed by learned Sessions Judge, Solan vide order dated 07.08.2024, which was further extended vide order dated 06.09.2024. Keeping in view the relief being sought in the petition, the same is being disposed of at the admission stage without issuing any notice to respondent No.2. 3. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended along with the present petition. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 4. Brief facts giving rise to the present case are that the present petitioner had been convicted by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Solan, vide judgment dated 05.07.2024, passed in Criminal Case No.266/3 of 2022/20 for having committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. By virtue of the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the petitioner had been sentenced to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of 6 months and to pay a compensation amount of Rs.5,65,000/-. 5. Being aggrieved of the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of senence, the present petitioner had preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Solan. On 07.08.2024, the execution of the substantive sentence imposed vide order dated 05.07.2024, was suspended, subject to the applicant furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and depositing of 20% of the compensation amount. 6. By virtue of order dated 07.08.2024, learned Sessions Judge, Solan had granted a month’s time to the petitioner to do the needful. 7. Since within the period of one month from 07.08.2024, 20% of the compensation amount, in the case at hand, was not deposited, therefore, petitioner was constrained to file another application for extension of time. The same was disposed of vide order dated 06.09.2024 (Annexure P-3) and again time was extended by further one month. 8. By virtue of Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, while hearing an appeal, the Appellate Court can direct the appellant to deposit minimum of 20% of the compensation awarded by the trial Court. By virtue of sub-Section 2 of Section 148 of the NI Act, time for depositing can at 3 the most be extended by 90 days. Since in the case at hand the period of 90 days has elapsed after the initial order of deposit dated 07.08.2024, therefore, the present petition has been filed. 9. Taking into account the financial condition of the present petitioner, as has been demonstrated in the present petition and the fact that the petitioner is making all out effort to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, in the case at hand, the present petiton is allowed in the interest of justice. Time for depositing the 20% of the compensation amount, as directed by the trial Court on 07.08.2024 and 06.09.2024, is extended further by one month from today i.e. 06.01.2025. 10. In view of the above terms, present petition stands disposed of, so also, pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Bipin Chander Negi) January 06, 2025 (KS) Judge