Anticipatory bail conditions and estoppel barred challenge to penalty in a cheque dishonour prosecution.

A challenge to a Rs. 50,000 penalty imposed while granting anticipatory bail in a Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act matter failed, as the petitioner had earlier obtained additional time to deposit the amount without questioning that order. The record of repeated non-appearance, cancellation of bail, issuance of warrants, adjournments, and earlier costs supported the view that the petitioner was estopped from disputing the earlier order. In these circumstances, the High Court held that the penalty was appropriate and in accordance with law, and no interference under Section 482 CrPC was warranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty of Rs. 50,000 imposed while granting anticipatory bail in proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was excessive or authority and warranted interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The petitioner had earlier sought extension of time to deposit the penalty amount and obtained further time by order dated 15.12.2021, without challenging that order. The record showed repeated non-appearance, cancellation of bail, issuance of warrants, repeated adjournments, and earlier imposition of costs in the complaint proceedings. In these circumstances, the Court held that the petitioner was estopped from challenging the earlier order and that the penalty imposed was appropriate and in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The challenge to the imposition of penalty failed and interference was not warranted.

---