[2025:RJ-JP:16744] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No.575/2022 IN S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1932/2022 Kishore Kumar Chawla Son Of Late Shri Chiman Lal Chawla, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Plot No. 12/508, Girdhar Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj) (Presently Residing At 11/1261, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur (Raj) (Office At Mahadev Dhaba, 111/200 A-Vijaypath, Mansarovar, Jaipur (Raj) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p 2. Suvalal Dusad Son Of Late Shri Damodar Lal Dusad, Resident Of A-191, Nehru Nagar, Jhotwara Road, Jaipur (Raj) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. M.K. Dhakad, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Manju Dave, P.P. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order 21/04/2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties on the application for suspension of sentence. The revision petition has been filed against the order dated 14.10.2019 passed by the learned trial Court in Criminal Complaint No.200/2017, whereby, the accused-petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and sentenced to undergo one year simple imprisonment (S.I.) along with fine of Rs.13,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months S.I. An appeal was preferred by the accused against the said order [2025:RJ-JP:16744] (2 of 3) [SOSR-575/2022 in CRLR- 1932/2022] which was dismissed by the learned appellate Court while affirming the order of the learned trial Court. Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submits that the accused-petitioner is behind the bars 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. 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, Kishore Kumar Chawla S/o Late Shri Chiman Lal Chawla is suspended till final disposal of the revision petition, provided he deposits a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft in the name of complainant in the learned trial Court within a period of 60 days from today 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 26th May, 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 [2025:RJ-JP:16744] (3 of 3) [SOSR-575/2022 in CRLR- 1932/2022] 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. In case the accused-petitioner fails to deposit the aforesaid amount by way of demand draft in the trial court within a period of 60 days, this order of suspension of sentence of the accused- petitioner shall be deemed to be cancelled automatically and the learned trial court shall proceed to comply with the order of sentence passed by trial court/appellate court. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for compliance. (UMA SHANKER VYAS),J YOGESH KUMAR /27