Pre-deposit of fine cannot be required before hearing a criminal revision petition under the CrPC.

SC held that, in the absence of a statutory mandate, deposit of the fine amount cannot be imposed as a precondition for entertaining or hearing a criminal revision petition under Sections 397 and 401 CrPC. The right to have the revision heard is distinct from the question whether any final relief should be granted, and revisional jurisdiction cannot be conditioned on prior deposit of the fine. The High Court's requirement of pre-deposit before hearing the revision was therefore impermissible, and the accused was entitled to pursue the revision before the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the deposit of the fine amount can be made a condition precedent for entertaining a criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The revision petition was filed against concurrent convictions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and the High Court had directed that the revision would not be heard unless the fine amount was deposited. The Court held that no mandatory statutory requirement obliged the accused to pre-deposit the fine amount as a condition for even hearing the revision petition. The question whether any ultimate relief would be granted in revision was distinct from the preliminary right to have the revision heard, and the revisional jurisdiction could not be conditioned upon prior deposit of the fine.

Conclusion: The High Court could not insist on deposit of the fine amount as a condition precedent for hearing the revision petition; the impugned order was set aside and the appellant was entitled to pursue the revision before the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of a statutory mandate, deposit of a fine amount cannot be imposed as a precondition for entertaining or hearing a criminal revision petition.

---