TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 645
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....7 on the file of Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act-03), South District, Saket Courts, Delhi challenges the order dated 13.12.2023, whereby he has been directed to return the amount of Rs.5,44,000/-, deposited under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the NI Act) by respondent nos. 2 and 3 herein and later released in his favour during the pendency of the appeal by the appellate court. 2. The petitioner herein instituted complaint case bearing No. 11160/2017 under Section 142 of the NI Act alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act by the second and third respondents herein. As per judgment dated 22.10.2021 and order on sentence dated 18.11.2021 the jurisdictional magistrate found both the acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....plainant that there is no statutory mandate requiring the refund of the deposited amount once the accused is acquitted, nor was there any independent application moved by the respondents seeking such refund. The impugned order was passed in haste without considering that the matter is sub judice before this Court in the present proceedings, and without granting adequate opportunity to the petitioner to raise his objections. It was also pointed out that the Apex Court, by order dated 22.08.2025 in SLP (Crl) No. 12216/2025, has not specifically directed the release of Rs.5,44,000/- to the respondents. It was also pointed out, that if at all refund could have been directed, the same could be done only by the appellate court and not by the tria....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... passed by three different courts, the petitioner/complainant failed and neglected to comply with the same and continued to retain the amount of Rs.5,44,000/-. On 01.04.2026, it was brought to the notice of this Court that orders dated 30.04.2025 and 19.08.2025 have not been complied with. On the said date, there was no representation for the petitioner/ complainant also. Hence, the petitioner/complainant was directed to appear in person or through counsel on the next date of hearing which was on 06.04.2026. On the said date, along with the present petition, CRL.L.P. 586/2023, CRL.M.A. 31972/2023, CRL.M.A. 35060/2023 and CRL.M.A. 30405/2025 came up for consideration. The order of this Court dated 06.04.2026 reads thus:- "7. After t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....petitioner/ complainant tried his best not to comply with the orders of this Court and it was only when he was left with no choice, he deposited the amount. 11. Here it would be apposite to refer to Section 148 of the NI Act, which reads:- "Section 148. Power of Appellate Court to order payment pending appeal against conviction - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), 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 per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court: Provided that the amount payable under this sub-section shall be in addition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lier after the appeal was disposed of by the Sessions Court, it is seen that the parties approached the trial court for release of the amount that was deposited by the respondents herein before the Appellate Court under 148 of the NI Act. It is true that the refund order should have been passed by the Appellate Court instead of the trial court. However, in the light of the subsequent developments in the case as revealed from the orders hereinabove referred to, this Court is not inclined to set aside the impugned order on the said sole ground. The petitioner/ complainant is seen to have resorted to all steps to see that the orders of this Court despite specific directions being given, was not complied with. When he moved the present petition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assed by this Court. The Apex Court has not in any way prevented this Court from finally disposing of this CRL.M.C. Therefore, I proceed to consider the CRL.M.C on merits. 16. The relevant portion of the order dated 01.10.2022 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS/ASJ (South), Saket Courts, Delhi in the application under Section 148 of the NI Act reads thus:- ".....Accordingly, the application u/s 148 NI Act is allowed. The appellant is directed to deposit 20% of the fine amount as awarded by the Ld. Trial Court. The amount be deposited within 60 days from today in the form of an FDR. The said FDR should be in the name of the respondent and shall be released to the respondent as and when requested. The respondent undertakes to repay....