Deposit conditions in cheque bounce appeals require reasons and a bond; blanket 20% directions are unsustainable.

Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act permits an appellate court to direct deposit during appeal only after exercising discretion on reasons, and the 20% minimum applies once such a deposit order is lawfully made. In a conviction under Section 138, a suspension of sentence request under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be met with a blanket 20% deposit direction without recording reasons or applying mind to the facts. The suspension order must also include a direction for execution of bond as required by law. A reasonless deposit condition and omission of bond direction render the order unsustainable and call for reconsideration.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate court could impose a condition to deposit 20% of the compensation amount while suspending sentence in an appeal under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 without recording reasons and without directing execution of bond.

Analysis: Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 confers discretion on the appellate court to order deposit pending appeal, and the minimum deposit of 20% arises only after the court decides that deposit is warranted. The discretion must be exercised on reasons, especially where suspension of sentence under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is sought in a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. A blanket direction to deposit 20% of the compensation amount without applying mind is unsustainable. The suspension order must also be accompanied by a direction for execution of bond in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The order imposing deposit of 20% without reasons and without directing execution of bond was unsustainable, and the matter required reconsideration.

---