TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubmitted that initially, the present opp. party no. 2 filed a complaint U/S 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the applicant bearing Complaint Case No.2213 of 2017 at Police Station Gomti Nagar, District Lucknow with allegations that the applicant had given cheques for total amount of Rs.4,50,000/- to the complainant for purchase of land, however, the said cheque got dishonored. 5. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant contested the matter before the Trial Court, wherein he got convicted and was ordered to pay Rs.6,75,000/- alongwith simple imprisonment for three months. In case of default of payment of fine, he was ordered to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months. The applicant preferred an appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. before the learned Special Judge, C.B.I.-6, Lucknow, which was admitted vide order dated 27.03.2024 and the applicant was released on bail subject to the deposition of 50% of the fine imposed by the learned trial court. 6. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the Trial Court i.e. Special Judge, N.I. Act, Lucknow without considering the legal and factual aspects of the matter, il....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ithin a period of 30 days from the date of the order and also provided that in case non-deposition of fine by the applicant, the bail order shall stand automatically cancelled. 11. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the Appellate Court while passing the impugned order dated 27.03.2024 by which it has only stayed 50% of the fine as imposed by the Trial Court, has failed to consider the Statutory Provisions as enshrined U/S 148(1) & 148 (2) of The Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, which resulted in miscarriage of justice. 12. Learned Counsel for the applicant further submitted that the impugned order dated 27.03.2024 by which the Appellate Court has provided that in case of failure of deposition of 50% fine by the applicant, the Bail Order shall stand automatically cancelled is punitive in nature and is against the settled proposition of law as it is settled propositions of law, that if any appeal is presented by the appellant and the same is admitted by the Appellate Court, in that event it is also obligatory for the Appellate Court to stay the operation of the impugned order under appeal during pendency of the appeal, thus, if any order is challenged and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that such delay has compromised sanctity of cheque transaction, Parliament thought it fit to amend Section 148 Purposive interpretation of Section 148 would be in furtherance of Objects and Reasons of amendment of Section 148 and also Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Section 148 of The Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, which has been inserted in the Act through Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2018 (Act No 20 of 2018) is reproduced hereunder : - "Section-148 : Power of Appellate Court to order payment pending appeal against conviction (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in an appeal by the drawer against conviction under section 138, the Appellate Court may order the appellant to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of twenty percent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court: Provided that the amount payable under this sub-section shall be in addition to any interim compensation paid by the appellant under section 143A. (2)The amount referred to in sub-section (1) shall be deposited within sixty days from the date of the order, or within such further period n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cted vide order dated 01.03.2024 passed by the trial court has failed to consider the Statutory Provisions as enshrined under Section 148(1) and 148(2) of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 as discussed above, which resulted in miscarriage of justice. 20. It is further observed here that the impugned order dated 27.03.2024 passed by the Appellate Court, by which it was provided that in case of failure of deposition of 50% of the fine by the appellant/applicant, the Bail Order shall stand automatically cancelled appears to be punitive in nature and is against the settled proposition of law as it is a settled proposition of law, that if any appeal is presented by the appellant and the same is admitted by the Appellate Court, in that event, it is also obligatory for the Appellate Court to grant interim relief in the appeal during the pendency of the appeal, thus, any order challenged in the appeal and the said appeal was admitted and pending, thus, one cannot permit a swinging pendulum to continue swinging during the pendency of the appeal. 21. The issue involved in this case has broadly been dealt by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the case of Surinder Singh Deswal A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as to provide, inter alia, speedy disposal of cases relating to the offence of the dishonour of cheques. So as to see that due to delay tactics by the unscrupulous drawers of the dishonoured cheques due to easy filing of the appeals and obtaining stay in the proceedings, an injustice was caused to the payee of a dishonoured cheque who has to spend considerable time and resources in the court proceedings to realise the value of the cheque and having observed that such delay has compromised the sanctity of the cheque transactions, Parliament has thought it fit to amend Section 148 of the NI Act. Therefore, such a purposive interpretation would be in furtherance of the Objects and Reasons of the amendment in Section 148 of the NI Act and also Section 138 of the NI Act." 22. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jamboo Bhandari vs. Madhya Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Limited and Others reported in (2023) 10 SCC 446 has been pleased to observe in paragraph No.12, which is reproduced hereinunder:- "12. In these circumstances, we set aside the impugned orders of the High Court and restore the revision petitions filed by the appellants before....