■ \ APHC010463022025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY. THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 9202 OF 2025 Between: Penkey Lakshmi, W/o (Late) Sivanadh Kumar, Aged 55 yrs 18, Andhra Battalion, NCC, East Godavari (Kakinada) District. Siddartha Nagar, NPCL Road, Kakinada, ...Petitioner/Appellant/Accused AND 1. The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep., by its Public Prosecutor High Court at Amaravathi. 2. Chinnapuvvula Naresh, S/o Plugeswara Rao, Aged 50 yrs, Seshagiram Street, Ramaraopeta, Kakinada, East Godavari District. ...Respondents/Respondents/Complainants Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition may be pleased to Quash the part of the Impugned Order passed in CrI M.P. No.25 of 2024 in C.A.No.32 of 2024 dated 02.02.2024 by the ill Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada only to an extent of imposing condition of “Depositing Rs.2,00.000/- in the Trial Court on or before 01.03.2024 failing which the suspension of sentence is automatically cancelled” by allowing the Criminal Petition. the High Court f lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to Stay part of the Impugned Order passed in CrI.M.P. No.25 of 2024 in C.A.No.32 of 2024 dated 02-02-2024 by the III Additional District and Sessions Judge , Kakinada only to an extent of imposing condition of “depositing of Rs.2,00,000/- in the Trial Court on or before 01.03.2024 failing which the suspension of sentence is automatically cancelled” pending disposal of the main Criminal Petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri R.Siva Sai Swarup, Advocate Counsel for Respondent No.1: The Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. Counsel for Respondent No.2: - The Court made the following order: APHC010463022025 HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH at AMARAVATl (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA rriMIM»' °-=TmnN NO: 9202/2025 IN THE [3396] THE HONOURABLE DR Between; KAKINADA, east GODAVARI (KAKINADA) DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED AND by ITS PUBLIC •1 THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP. PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATHI. 2,CH1NNAPUWULA NARESH, s/0 SESHAGIRAM STREET, GODAVARI DISTRICT. PLUGESWARA RAO, AGED 50 YRS, EAST RAMARAOPETA KAKINADA, ...RESPONDENT/CONlPLAINANT(S); Counsel for the Petitioner/accused: 1.RS1VASAI SWARUP Counsel for the Respondent/coniplainant(S); 1. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Court made the following ORDER: The instant petition under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed, by the Petitioner/ Accused, seeking quashment of the order in CrI M.P. No.25/2024 in C.A.No.32/2024 dt.02-02-2024 the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kakinada. 2. Heard Sri R.Siva Sai Swarup, learned counsel for the Petitioner learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State/Respondent. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the subject Criminal Petition is squarely covered by the Order passed by this Court vide Criminal Petition No.5914 of 2024, dated 28.08.2024, wherein, it was held at paras 7 and 8 as under: The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others^ referring above para in the case of Surinder Singh Deswal @ Colonel S.S.Deswal and others, held in paras 6 to 9 as under: What is held by this Court is that a purposive interpretation should be made of Section 148 of the N.l. Act Hence, normally. Appellate Court will be justified in imposing the condition of deposit as provided in Section 148. However, in a case where the Appellate Court is satisfied that the condition of deposit 20% will be unjust or imposing such a condition will amount to deprivation of the right of appeal of the appellant, exception be made for the reasons specifically recorded. on the file of and acceded to, matter of this 7. b. of can 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 776 3 Therefore, when Appellate Court considers the prayer under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. of an accused who has been convicted for offence under Section 138 of the N.l. Act, it is always open for the Appellate Court to consider whether it is an exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing the condition of deposit of 20% of the fine/compensation amount. >As stated earlier, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that it is an exceptional case, the reasons for coming to the said conclusion must be recorded. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the original complainant is that neither before the Sessions Court nor before the High Court, there was a plea made by the appellants that an exception may be made in these cases and the requirement of deposit or minimum 20% of the amount be dispensed with. He submits that if such a prayer was not made by the appellants, there were no reasons for the Courts to consider the said plea. We disagree with the above submission. When an accused applies under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence, he normally applies for grant of relief of suspension of sentence without any condition. Therefore, when a blanket order is sought by the appellants, the Court has to consider whether the case falls in exception or not. ” Therefore, in the light of above judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, normally, the Appellate Court will be justified in imposing condition of deposit as provided in Section 148 of N.l.Act. However, in a case, whether the Appellate Court is satisfied with the condition of deposit of 20%) will be unjust, exception can be made for the reason specifically recorded. Hence, when the Appellate Court considers an application filed U/s. 389(3) Cr.P.C. corresponding to Section 430 of BNSS by the drawer of the cheque (accused), who was convicted for the offence U/s. 138 of Negotiable 1. 8. 9. 8. i 4 Instruments Act, the Appellant Court has to consider whether it is exceptional case which warrants grant of suspension of sentence without imposing condition of deposit of 20% of fine/compensation amount. If the Appellate Court comes to said conclusion that it is an exceptional case, reasons for coming to such conclusion must be recorded. ” Considering the submissions made and following the Order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.5914 of 2024, dated 28.08.2024, this Criminal Petition is allowed. The impugned order of the learned Appellate Court is set side and restoring the application filed by the appellant U/s.389 (3) Cr.P.C., corresponding to section 430 of BNSS before the Appellate Court. The petitioner/accused shall appear before the learned Appellate Court within three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On such appearance, the learned Appellate Court shall consider the application afresh and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within (07) days. Till then, the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court stands suspended. If the petitioner/accused fails to appear before the learned Appellate Court as directed above, the Criminal Petition stands dismissed without recourse to the Court. 4. seven Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- M SRINIVAS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. The III Additional District and Sessions Judge. Kakinada, East Godavari District. 2. One CC to Sri R.Siva Sai Swarup, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CC’s to the Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P. [OUT] 4. Three CD Copies To, GPC sree ■n* HIGH COURT DATED: 04/09/2025 ORDER CRLP NO. 9202 OF 2025 % 1 1 SEP 2025 (9 ^V>Ci»wmS«cliii)Xty ALLOWING THIS CRIMINAL PETITION