Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the amended proviso to Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applies to a pending appeal and empowers the appellate court to direct deposit of at least 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court.
Analysis: The petition challenged the appellate order requiring deposit of 20% of the compensation amount as a condition for suspension of sentence. The Court noted that the amendment to Section 148 expressly permits the appellate court, in an appeal against conviction under Section 138, to direct deposit of a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court. The Court further held that the amendment applies to pending matters, and the appeal was still pending before the appellate court. The contention that compensation does not form part of fine was rejected in light of the amended statutory language.
Conclusion: The appellate court was justified in directing deposit of 20% of the compensation amount, and the challenge to the conditional suspension order failed.
Final Conclusion: The petition was rejected, and the conditional order passed by the appellate court was upheld.
Ratio Decidendi: The amended proviso to Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act authorises the appellate court, in a pending appeal, to require deposit of a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court as a condition for suspension of sentence.