Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:120636 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 20118 of 2025 Applicant :- Dhyanveer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Awadh Sharma,Shivniket Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Sri Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate has made a statement at bar the he has filed his Vakalatnam on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Awadh Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.K. Singh learned AGA for the State. and Sri Dheeraj Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2. 3. A joint statement has been made by learned counsels for the parties that they do not propose to file any supplementary affidavit and the application be decided on the basis of documents available on record. 4. With the consent of the parties the application has been decided at the fresh stage. 5. This is an application filed U/s 528 BNSS for quashing the impugned order dated 28.04.2025 passed by In-charge Sessions Judge, Saharanpur in Criminal Appeal No. 45 of 2025 (Sachin Pawar vs. Dhyanveer) U/s 138 of N.I. Act, P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur. 6. The case of the applicant is that post lodging of the complaint by the opposite party no.2 U/s 138 of N.I. Act by the Presiding Officer i.e. Additional Court, Saharanur in complaint case no. 976 of 2018 awarding imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 10 lac out of which 9.90 lacs was liable to be paid to the complainant and rest with the State, challenging the said order, the applicant preferred criminal appeal no. 45 of 2025 before the court of Sessions Judge at Saharanpur along with an application for staying of the sentence as well as staying the recovery of the amount which came to be decided on 28.04.2025 whereby a direction was issued to the appellant to deposit 20 per cent of the total fine amount within a period of seven day. 7. Questioning the order dated 28.04.2025 passed in criminal appeal no. 45 of 2025 in so far as are issues are granted direction for deposit 20 per cent out of total fine amount of Rs.10 lacs, the present application has been preferred. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the order dated 28.04.2025 passed in criminal appeal no. 45 of 2025 in so far as it directs that the applicants be deposited 20 per cent of the total amount of Rs. 10 lacs cannot be sustained as the same is not as per the mandate in the case of Jamboo Bhandari vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation LTD and ors, 2023 Live Law (SC) 776 and in the case of Muskan Enterprises and Another vs. State of Punjab and another, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 5491 of 2024 decided on 19, December, 2024 wherein the case of the applicant ought to have been considered whether it falls within the exceptional category or not. He further submit that the said exercise is thoroughly lacking and thus, the order impugned be set aside and the matter be remitted back to the court below for passing a fresh order. 9. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2 does not dispute the said fact and according to them the matter be remitted back to the court below for passing a fresh order strictly in accordance with law within the time bound period. 10. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully. 11. Apparently post lodging of the complaint U/s 138 of N.I. Act, the applicant was convicted. Thereafter the applicant preferred an appeal along with the stay application for stay of the conviction and recovery and on 28.04.2025 in exercise of powers conferred U/s 148 of N.I. Act, the applicant has been directed to deposit 20 per cent out of the total amount of Rs. 10 lacs. The same is not as per the mandate in the case of Jamboo Bhandari (Supra) and in the case of Muskan Enterprises (Supra) as the lower appellate court under obligation to have evaluated the case of the applicant whether it falls within the exceptional category or not. Since the said exercise is lacking, thus, the application decided in the following manner: a. The order dated 28.04.2025 passed by In-charge Sessions Judge, Saharanpur in Criminal Appeal No. 45 of 2025 (Sachin Pawar vs. Dhyanveer) U/s 138 of N.I. Act, P.S. Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur in so far as it directs 20 per cent of the total fine amount to be deposited by the appellant out of Rs. 10 lac is set aside. b. The matter stands remitted back to the court to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. c. The applicant and the opposite party no.2 as per the instructions received from their clients submits that they shall not take any unnecessary adjournment, thus, the court below is directed to decide the same strictly in accordance with law without granting any unnecessary adjournment and in case any adjournment is granted, the same should in exceptional circumstances not beyond three days at a stretch. 12. For facilitation and early disposal, a copy of the order be submitted by the parties by 31.07.2025. Order Date :- 21.7.2025 C. MANI (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad