[2026:RJ-JP:16402] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5158/2019 Anil Agarwal S/o Shri Mangilal Agarwal, R/o 8/114, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur, Raj. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Mahaveer Prasad Yadav S/o Shri Harchand Yadav R/o Village Ladpura, Post Harsora, Tehsil Bansur, District Alwar, At Present Kotputli, District Jaipur, Raj. 2. State of Rajasthan, Through PP. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None present For Respondent(s) : Mr. Jitendra Singh Rathore, PP with Ms. Neha Goyal JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 18/04/2026 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., challenging the impugned order dated 29.04.2019 passed by the Court of the Additional District & Sessions Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as, "the Appellate Court") whereby the Appellate Court while allowing the application filed by the petitioner for suspension of sentence in a pending appeal against the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, "the NI Act") has imposed a condition on the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine amount. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Appellate Court was not justified in directing the petitioner to deposit 20% [2026:RJ-JP:16402] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-5158/2019] of the fine amount because by putting such condition it has taken away the petitioner’s right to file an appeal. Learned counsel submits that the financial condition of the petitioner is meager and he is suffering from financial crisis, therefore, the amount of fine shall be relaxed against the petitioner. 3. In support of his aforesaid contention, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd & Ors. reported in (2023) 10 SCC 446, and the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the case of Kailash Soni Vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. while deciding SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.2624/2024 and the judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Harsh Mucchala Vs. Raghav Kacholiya while deciding SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.7955/2024. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the arguments put forward by learned counsel for the petitioner and looking to the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari (supra), judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court at Principal Seat, Jodhpur in the case of Kailash Soni (supra) and the judgment passed in the case of Harsh Mucchala (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to modify the impugned order dated 29.04.2019 passed by the Appellate Court to the extent that the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the fine amount in place of 20%. [2026:RJ-JP:16402] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-5158/2019] 6. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands partly allowed. The impugned order dated 29.04.2019 passed by the Appellate Court stands modified only to the extent of fine amount. Hence, the petitioner is directed to deposit 10% of the fine amount and the rest of the conditions imposed by the Appellate Court shall remain intact. 7. In case, 10% of the fine amount is not deposited by the petitioner within a period of fifteen days from today, the order dated 29.04.2019 will come into picture automatically and the petitioner would deposit 20% of the fine amount as directed by the Appellate Court. 8. For a period of fifteen days from today, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. 9. The stay application and all other application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Shivam/18