Section 148 cheque dishonour appeals require ordinary deposit of not less than 20% and interim protection pending appeal.

Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is treated as a purposive provision in cheque dishonour appeals to curb delay and secure interim protection during pendency. The appellate court should ordinarily direct deposit of not less than 20% of the fine or compensation, with departure permitted only for special reasons. The note says that refusal to stay recovery of the entire fine and an automatic cancellation of bail for non-deposit were inconsistent with the statutory scheme. It also records that supervisory interference may be used to modify such an order and preserve bail pending disposal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate court erred in refusing to stay the operation of the conviction and fine order in a cheque dishonour appeal, and whether the supervisory court should direct deposit of 20% of the fine while continuing the bail pending disposal of the appeal.

Analysis: Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as amended, was treated as a purposive provision intended to curb delay in appeals arising from convictions under Section 138. The minimum deposit requirement was read as the governing rule, with discretion to deviate being limited and to be exercised for special reasons. The appellate court's refusal to stay the recovery of the entire fine, along with the direction that non-deposit would automatically cancel bail, was found inconsistent with the statutory scheme and the settled approach requiring interim protection during pendency of the appeal. The supervisory court also relied on the Supreme Court's interpretation that the appellate court should ordinarily require deposit of not less than 20% of the fine or compensation.

Conclusion: The refusal to grant stay was held to be legally unsustainable, and the order was modified to require deposit of 20% of the fine within sixty days while keeping the bail operative till disposal of the appeal.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded to the extent of modification of the appellate order, with conditional protection of the petitioner during the pendency of the criminal appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: In an appeal against conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the appellate court should ordinarily insist on deposit of not less than 20% of the fine or compensation, and refusal to grant corresponding interim protection may be interfered with in supervisory jurisdiction.

---