Reasonable bail conditions in sentence suspension cannot make the right of appeal illusory; deposit condition quashed.

While suspending sentence in an appeal under Section 389 CrPC, the appellate court may impose conditions, but they must remain reasonable and not so onerous that compliance becomes impossible. In a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, a condition requiring deposit of 25% of the cheque amount as a condition for release was found to be harsh because it could defeat the statutory right of appeal and expose the appellant to incarceration for non-compliance. The Gujarat HC quashed the deposit condition and set aside the impugned orders.

---

---

Issues: Whether the condition requiring deposit of 25% of the cheque amount while suspending sentence in an appeal under Section 389 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 was liable to be quashed.

Analysis: The conviction was under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The appellate court had suspended the sentence but made release conditional on deposit of 25% of the cheque amount. The Court held that although the appellate court may impose conditions while granting suspension of sentence and bail, such conditions must be reasonable and not so onerous that compliance becomes impossible. Relying on the principles stated by the Supreme Court, the Court found that a condition which effectively defeats the statutory right of appeal and may result in incarceration for non-compliance is impermissible.

Conclusion: The condition requiring deposit of 25% of the cheque amount was held to be harsh and unsustainable, and it was quashed.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded and the impugned orders imposing the deposit condition were set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Conditions imposed while suspending sentence pending appeal must be reasonable and cannot be so harsh that they render the statutory right of appeal illusory or lead to imprisonment for inability to comply.

---