[2026:RJ-JP:22748] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7334/2024 Harish Kumar Saini Son of Shri Lekhram Saini, R/o T-154, Vivekanand Colony, Tehsil Road, Mahawa, District Dausa Ra- jasthan. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor. 2. Jagmohan Gurjar Son of Shri Bheekaram Gurjar, R/o Samaspur, Village Panchayat Khonchpuri, Tehsil Mahawa, District Dausa, Rajasthan. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Gupta-Asstt.G.A JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/05/2026 1. The instant criminal misc. petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 528 BNSS, challenging the order dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mahawa, District Dausa (for short, “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 Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as, "the NI Act") has directed the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine amount. 2. None has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. 3. The petitioner has submitted in this misc. petition that the Appellate Court was not justified for directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the fine amount because putting such condition [2026:RJ-JP:22748] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7334/2024] has taken away the petitioner’s right to file an appeal. The petitioner has further submitted in this misc. petition that financial condition of the petitioner is very poor and he is suffering from financial crisis, therefore, the amount of fine be relaxed against the petitioner. 4 Learned Assistant Government Advocate is not in a position to controvert the submissions made by the petitioner in this misc. petition, however, he has submitted that this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 219/2025 (Sulakshna Sharma Vs. Krishna Devi) decided on 16.01.2025, partly allowed the said criminal misc. petition relying upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd & Ors. reported in (2023) 10 SCC 446, and 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 vide order dated 02.08.2024 and judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Harsh Mucchal Vs. Raghav Kacholiya while deciding SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.7955/2024 vide order dated 27.11.2024. 5. Perusal of the misc. petition shows that the controversy involved in this misc. petition is identical to the one settled by this Court in the case of Sulakshna Sharma (Supra) vide order dated 16.01.2025 and in view of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari (supra), judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of [2026:RJ-JP:22748] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7334/2024] Kailash Soni (supra) and the judgment passed in the case of Harsh Mucchal (supra), this Court deems it just and proper to modify the impugned order dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Appellate Court to the extent that the petitioner shall deposit 10% of the fine amount in place of 20%. 6. Accordingly, the instant criminal misc. petition stands partly allowed. The impugned order dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Appellate Court stands modified only to the extent of the fine amount. Hence, the petitioner is directed to deposit 10% of the fine amount (if the appeal is still lying pending). Rest of the conditions imposed by the Appellate Court shall remain as it is. 7. In case, 10% of the fine amount is not deposited by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today, the order dated 07.10.2024 will come into picture automatically and the petitioner would deposit 20% of the fine amount as directed by the Appellate Court. 8. Till then, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner. 9. Stay application and all other application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of accordingly. 10. Since the petitioner is not aware about passing of this order, Office is directed to send a copy of this order on the residential address of the petitioner mentioned in the array of cause title for his intimation and information. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/76