CRM-M-18966-2025 -1- 130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-18966-2025 Date of Decision: 07.04.2025 Love Goyal ..... Petitioner Versus Murli Dhar .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Gaurav Vir Singh Behl, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) 1. Prayer in the present petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, is for quashing of the order dated 17.01.2025 (Annexure P-8), passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Malerkotla vide which sentence of the petitioner was suspended with the condition to deposit 20% of the compensation awarded by learned trial Court awarded vide order dated 19.12.2024. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that petitioner was prosecuted in a complaint under Section 138 the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, ‘the Act’) and he was convicted by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malerkotla under Section 138 of the Act, vide judgment dated 19.12.2024 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and was ordered to pay compensation to the tune of double the cheque amount to the complainant. It is further submitted that against the order dated 19.12.2024, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge at Malerkotla and learned Appellate Court vide its impugned order dated 17.01.2025 (Annexure P-8) suspended the sentence of petitioner subject to deposit of 20% of the compensation amount with the aid of Section 148 of the NI Act. However, due to financial constraints, the SHARMILA DEVI 2025.04.08 10:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment PHHC CRM-M-18966-2025 -2- petitioner failed to comply with the order dated 17.01.2025. He submits that even otherwise, the impugned order dated 17.01.2025 passed by the learned Appellate Court is in violation of the law settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari vs M.P.State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. and others, 2024(1) SCC (Cri) 90 wherein it has been held that 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 NI 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, which is missing in the present case. It is submitted that learned trial Court has not appreciated the case and circumstances of the petitioner as per mandate of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari’s case (supra). 3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the record, it is apparent that sentence of the petitioner was suspended by learned Appellate Court subject to deposit of 20% of the compensation amount awarded by learned trial Court. However, the petitioner did not comply with the same. 4. In view of the aforesaid facts and the judicial precedent settled by Hon’ble Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari’s case (supra), without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the present petition is disposed of. Petitioner is relegated to approach the learned Appellate Court SHARMILA DEVI 2025.04.08 10:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment PHHC CRM-M-18966-2025 -3- concerned and file an appropriate application before it, which would be decided, by taking into consideration the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari’s case (supra) in this regard within one month from the date of its filing. The direction given in the order dated 17.01.2025 by learned Appellate Court to the extent of depositing 20% of compensation, is set aside and the petitioner will continue to remain on bail as per order dated 17.01.2025 of learned Appellate Court till the above-said application is disposed of by it. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 07.04.2025 JUDGE sharmila Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SHARMILA DEVI 2025.04.08 10:02 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment PHHC