- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28638 CRL.P No. 6077 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6077 OF 2026 BETWEEN: MR. NAZIMULLA KHAN SON OF ULLI DAWAD KHAN AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.90/1, 3RD CROSS, 19TH MAIN, BTM 2ND STAGE, BILEKAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 076. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHANKAR H.S, ADVOCATE) AND: M/S. MARUTHI MERCHANTS FINANCE COMPANY NO.179, 3RD MAIN, KEMPEGOWDA NAGAR T.DASARAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560 057 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER SRI. MANJAIAH B.H SON OF LATE HANUMAIAH. …RESPONDENT THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C (U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DTD 24.01.2026 PASSED IN CRL.A.NO.1491/2025 BY THE HONBLE LXIII ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH-64) BENGALURU, ON THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER/APPELLANT U/S 389 OF CR.P.C AND CONSEQUENTLY BE PLEASED TO ALLOW THE Digitally signed by SANJEEVINI J KARISHETTY Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28638 CRL.P No. 6077 of 2026 SAID APPLICATION BY GRANTING REASONABLE TIME TO THE PETITIONER TO DEPOSIT THE AMOUNT. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question the order dated 24.01.2026 passed in Crl.A.No.1491/2025 passed by the LXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-64), Bengaluru on an application filed under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('the Cr.P.C.' for short). 2. The petitioner is the accused, who gets convicted for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, files an appeal in Crl.A.No.1491/2025 before the Appellate Court and an application seeking suspension of sentence. Sentence is suspended, subject to the condition of deposit of 20% of the amount. The 20% of the amount is deposited, but not within the time directed by the concerned Court, it was deposited with delay. The same is not - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:28638 CRL.P No. 6077 of 2026 accepted and the order of suspending the sentence is set at naught. This is what is called in question in the case at hand. 3. No doubt there is delay in deposit, but nonetheless the deposit is made. The concerned Court ought to have accepted the plea of the petitioner seeking time to deposit the amount. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that within two weeks from today, the deposit would be made. Therefore, I deem it appropriate to dispose the petition by permitting the petitioner to deposit the amount within two weeks from today. In the event, the petitioner would not deposit, the order that has revoked the suspension of sentence will get revived. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 42