Court adjusts appellant's payment obligation, highlights appeal rights, and invokes inherent powers to rectify situation

The court, recognizing the appellant's financial constraints and the impact of the pandemic, modified the order directing payment for the appeal's hearing. Instead of 50%, the appellant was directed to deposit 25% of the compensation amount in accordance with Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court emphasized the appellant's right to appeal, the need to avoid technical barriers, and the judicious exercise of discretion. It invoked inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code to rectify the situation, setting aside the impugned orders, restoring the appeal, and remanding the matter for a fresh decision.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order directing payment of 50% compensation amount for hearing of appeal under Section 5 of Limitation Act.

Analysis:
The revision application contested an order directing the appellant to pay 50% of the compensation amount for the appeal's hearing. The initial conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act involved dishonored cheques. The appellant appealed against the conviction but faced the requirement to pay 50% of the compensation amount for the appeal's hearing, leading to the revision application.

The appellant argued financial constraints and the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on his ability to pay the specified amount. The appellant emphasized the importance of his right to appeal and sought a more lenient payment condition. The court considered the retrospective operation of Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which mandates a minimum deposit of 20% of the compensation amount for appeals against conviction under Section 138.

The court acknowledged the significance of the appellant's right to appeal and the need to avoid technical barriers. It noted that the directive to pay 50% of the compensation amount was not absolute and could be modified. The court highlighted the need for judicious exercise of discretion, especially considering external factors like the pandemic and systematic delays.

In light of these considerations, the court directed the appellant to deposit 25% of the compensation amount as per Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court also addressed the subsequent dismissal of the appellant's appeal due to non-payment, emphasizing the need to set aside consequent orders when the original order is overturned.

The court invoked inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code to rectify the situation, ensuring justice and setting aside the impugned orders. Consequently, the court set aside the orders directing payment, restored the appeal and application to their original status, and remanded the matter back to the Appellate Court for a fresh decision.

In conclusion, the revisional application and connected application were disposed of, with the court emphasizing the importance of delivering certified copies of the judgment to the respective advocates promptly.

---