Deepak Kumar v. State of Haryana and Another

117-Co INoTHEoHIGHoCOURToOFoPUNJABoANDoHARYANAoATo CHANDIGARHo o o o o o o o o o CRM-M-8367-2023o o o o o o o o Dateoofodecisiono:o16.02.2023o o oDEEPAKoKUMARo o o o o o …Petitionero o Versuso o STATEoOFoHARYANAoANDoANOTHERo o o …Respondentso o CORAM:oo HON'BLEoMR.oJUSTICEoHARSHoBUNGERo Presento:o Mr.oR.S.oRandhawa,oAdvocateo o o forotheopetitioner.o o HARSHoBUNGER,oJ.oo o Theo petitionero ino theo presento petitiono iso seekingo quashingo ofo ordero datedo 29.09.2022o (Annexureo P-1)o passedo byo learnedo Additionalo SessionsoJudge,oFaridabadoinoCRA-309-2022otitledoasoMr.oDeepakoKumarovso Jalo Shaktio Viharo Residentialo Welfareo Society,o whereby,o theo petitionero (appellant-convictoinoCRA-309-2022)ohasobeenodirectedotoodeposito20%oofo theocompensationoamountoawardedobyotheotrialoCourtowithino60odaysofromotheo dateoofoorderoinoviewoofoSectiono148oofotheoNegotiableoInstrumentsoAct,o1881o (foroshorto`N.IoAct,o1881')o(asoamendedoup-to-date).o o o o o Briefo factso ofo theo caseo areo thato respondento No.2-complainanto filedoaocomplaintounderoSectiono138oofotheoN.IoAct,o1881,obyostatingothatotheo complainantoisotheoResidentialoWelfareoSocietyoofoJaloShaktioVihar,owhichoiso situatedoatoSectoro63,oUnchagaon,oFaridabadoandotheopetitionerowasostatedotoo beotheoformeroTreasureroofotheoaboveosaidoSocietyoforotheoyearo2012-13.oIto wasostatedothatotheopetitionero(herein),oduringohisotenureoasoTreasureroofotheo JaloShaktioViharoResidentialoWelfareoSociety,ohasodivertedoandotransferredo Rs.88.50o lacso fromo theo periodo 23.04.2012o too 21.11.2013o fromo theo banko accounto No.82142010123587o ato Syndicateo Bank,o NIT,o Faridabado ofo theo societyoinotheobankoaccountoofohisoownocompanyoinotheonameoofoM/soPDSo InfrastructuresoandoConsultantsoPvt.oLtd.oandoDivyanoInfratechoPvt.oLtd.oItoiso furtherostatedoinotheocomplaintothatoafterothefundodiversionocameointootheo light,otheoaccusedoinotheocomplaintopromisedotoorefundo50%oofotheoamountobyo November,o2017oandobalanceo50%opaymentobyoMarch,o2018,owhichowasoalsoo recordedoinotheominutesoofoGeneraloBodyoMeetingoofotheosocietyoheldoono

24.09.2017.o Ito waso furthero statedo thato ino theo saido meeting,o theo petitionero issuedopostodatedochequeoNo.067447odatedo12.12.2017oforoRs.10,00,000/-o drawnoatoHDFCoBank,oSectoro35,oFaridabado(theopetitionerobeingoauthorizedo signatoryoofoPDSoInfrastructuresoandoConsultantsoPvt.oLtd.),oinotheonameoofo complainant-Societyo fromo Accounto no.910020010439258o towardso theo dischargeoofotheiroliability.oHowever,owhenotheosaidochequeowasopresented,o theosameowasodishonouredothreeotimesoandolastlyoono28.12.2017,otheochequeo wasoreturnedounpaidowithoremarkso"FundsoInsufficient"oandowasoreturnedo video memoo datedo 28.12.2017.o Ito appearso thato thereafter,o ao legalo noticeo (Annexureo P-3)o datedo 11.01.2018o waso sent,o whicho waso followedo byo theo complainto undero Sectiono 138o ofo theo N.I.o Act,o 1881,o againsto theo presento petitioneroandoanother.oTheoJudicialoMagistrateoIstoClass,oFaridabad,oaftero appreciatingotheoevidenceoonorecord,oconvictedotheopresentopetitionerovideo judgmentodatedo24.08.2022oandofurtheropassedoorderoofosentenceovideoordero datedo29.08.2022o(AnnexureoP-4),owherebyotheopetitionerowasosentencedotoo undergoosimpleoimprisonmentoforoaoperiodoofooneoyearoandofurtherotoopayotheo compensationotootheotuneoofoRs.20,00,000/-o(doubleoofotheochequeoamount)otoo theo complainanto undero Sectiono 143(1)o ofo theo N.I.o Acto reado witho Sectiono 357(1)(3)oofotheoCr.P.C.,owithinoaoperiodoofooneomonthofromotheodateoofo passingoofosaidojudgment.oo o o Theopetitionerochallengedotheoaforesaidojudgmentoofoconvictiono andoorderoofosentenceobyofilingoanoappealobeforeotheoCourtoofoSessionsoJudge,o Faridabad,owhichocameotoobeoregisteredoasoCRA-309-2022.oAlongowithotheo appeal;otheopetitioneroalsoofiledoanoapplicationoforosuspensionoofosentence.o o o LearnedoAdditionaloSessionsoJudge,oFaridabad,ovideoorderodatedo

29.09.2022,o suspendedo theo sentenceo ofo theo petitionero byo observingo asoo under:-o o o "Ino theo presento case,o theo chequeo amounto iso Rs.10,00,000/-oandotheocompensationoawardedobyoLd.oTrialo Courto iso Rs.20,00,000/-.o Havingo regardo too theo aforesaido provisionoi.e.oSectiono148oofotheoN.I.oAct,oappellantoisodirectedo too deposito ano amounto ofo Rs.4,00,000/-o i.e.o 20%o ofo theo compensationoamountoinotheoformoofobankodraft/FixedoDeposito inofavouroofotheocomplainant/respondentowithinoaoperiodoofo60o daysofromotoday.oOnodepositoofotheosaidodraft,otheosameoshallo beodealtowithoinotermsoofoprovisionocontainedou/so148oofoN.I.o Act.o o o 5.Inocaseoaforesaidoamountowillonotobeodisbursedotoo complainanto ando appealo iso noto disposedo ofo prioro too theo validityo periodo ofo Banko draft,o theno appellanto shallo furnisho freshodraftoofotheosameoamountowithofreshovalidityoperiod,otillo theoappealoisodisposedoof.oOrderedoaccordingly.oSubjectotootheo aforesaidoconditions,oappellant-DeepakoKumaroisoadmittedotoo bailoonofurnishingobailobondsoinotheosumoofoRs.2,00,000/-owitho oneo suretyo ino theo likeo amounto too theo satisfactiono ofo thiso Court."o o o Theopresentopetitionohasobeenofiledochallengingotheoorderodatedoo

29.09.2022o(AnnexureoP-1)opassedobyolearnedoAdditionaloSessionsoJudge,o FaridabadotootheoextentowherebyotheobailounderoSectiono389oofotheoCodeoofo Criminalo Procedureo grantedo too theo petitionero haso beeno madeo subjecto too conditionoofodepositoofo20%oofocompensationoamountoawardedobyotrialoCourt.oo o o Theosaidoimpugnedoorderohasobeenochallengedoprimarilyoonotwoo groundsoi.e.oo

(i)o thato theo provisionso containedo ino Sectiono 148o ofo theo Negotiableo Instrumentso Act,o areo onlyo directoryo ando noto mandatoryo ando accordingly,o theo impugnedo ordero mayo beo quashedotootheoextentowhereby,otheopetitionerohasobeenodirectedo toodeposito20%oofotheo compensationo amounto awardedobyo theo trialoCourtoinotermsoofoSectiono148oofotheoN.I.oAct;oo

(ii)o thattheo suspensiono ofo sentenceo grantedo byo theo lowero AppellateoCourtocouldonotohaveobeenomadeosubjectotoodepositoofo 20%oofotheocompensationoamountoawardedobyotheotrialoCourt.o o o Iohaveoheardolearnedocounseloforotheopetitioneroandohaveoperusedo theopaperobookoasowelloasoimpugnedoorderodatedo29.09.2022o(AnnexureoP-1)o passedobyotheolearnedoAdditionaloSessionsoJudge,oFaridabad.o o o Sectiono148oofotheoN.I.oAct,o1881oreadsoasoundero:-o o [148.o Powero ofo Appellateo Courto too ordero paymento pendingo appealo againsto conviction.-(1)o Notwithstandingo anythingocontainedoinotheoCodeoofoCriminaloProcedure,o1973o (2oofo1974),oinoanoappealobyotheodraweroagainstoconvictiono undero sectiono 138,o theo Appellateo Courto mayo ordero theo appellantotoodepositosuchosumowhichoshallobeoaominimumoofo twentyoperocent.oofotheofineoorocompensationoawardedobyotheo trialoCourt:o o Providedothatotheoamountopayableounderothisosub-sectiono shallobeoinoadditionotooanyointerimocompensationopaidobyotheo appellantounderosectiono143A.o o (2)o Theo amountoreferredotooino sub-sectiono (1)oshallobeo depositedo withino sixtyo dayso fromo theo dateo ofo theo order,o oro withinosuchofurtheroperiodonotoexceedingothirtyodaysoasomayo beodirectedobyotheoCourtoonosufficientocauseobeingoshownobyo theoappellant.o o (3)o Theo Appellateo Courto mayo directo theo releaseo ofo theo amountodepositedobyotheoappellantotootheocomplainantoatoanyo timeoduringotheopendencyoofotheoappeal:o o Providedo thato ifo theo appellanto iso acquitted,o theo Courto shallo directo theo complainanto too repayo too theo appellanto theo amounto soo released,o witho interesto ato theo banko rateo aso publishedo byo theo Reserveo Banko ofo India,o prevalento ato theo beginningo ofo theo relevanto financialo year,o withino sixtyo dayso fromotheodateoofotheoorder,oorowithinosuchofurtheroperiodonoto exceedingo thirtyodayso aso mayo beo directedo byo theoCourtoono sufficientocauseobeingoshownobyotheocomplainant.]o o o Theoaforesaidoprovisionohasobeenoconsideredoandostandsosettledo byoanoauthoritativeojudgmentopassedobyoHon'bleotheoApexoCourtoinoSurindero SinghoDeswalo@oCol.oS.S.oDeswaloov.ooVirenderoGandhioAIRo2019oSupremeo Courto2956,otheorelevantoparagraphonos.8,o9oando10oareoquotedobelowo:-o "8.oItoisotheocaseoonobehalfoofotheoappellantsothatoasotheocriminalo complaintsoagainstotheoappellantsounderoSectiono138ooofotheoN.I.o Actowereolodged/filedobeforeotheoamendmentoActoNo.o20/2018obyo whicho Sectiono 148o ofo theo N.I.o Acto cameo too beo amendedo ando thereforeoamendedoSectiono148oofotheoN.I.oActoshallonotobeomadeo applicable.oHowever,oitoisorequiredotoobeonotedothatoatotheotimeo whenotheoappealsoagainstotheoconvictionoofotheoappellantsoforo theo offenceo undero Sectiono 138o oofo theo N.I.o Acto wereo preferred,oAmendmentoActoNo.o20/2018oamendingoSectiono148o ofotheoN.I.oActocameointooforceow.e.f.o1.9.2018.oEven,oatotheotimeo wheno theo appellantso submittedo application/so underoSectiono 389oofotheoCr.P.C.otoosuspendootheosentenceopendingoappealso challengingo theo convictiono ando sentence,o amendedo Sectiono 148oofotheoN.I.oActocameointooforceoandowasobroughtoonostatuteo w.e.f.o1.9.2018.oTherefore,oconsideringotheoobjectoandopurposeo ofo amendmento ino Sectiono 148o oofo theo N.I.o Acto ando whileo GURPREET KAUR suspendingo theo sentenceo ino exerciseo ofo powerso underoSectiono

389 of the Cr.P.C., when the first appellate court directed the appellants to deposit 25% of the amount of fine/compensation as imposed by the learned trial Court, the same can be said to be absolutely in consonance with the Statement of Objects and Reasons of amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act.

8.1 Having observed and found that because of the delay tactics of unscrupulous drawers of dishonoured cheques due to easy filing of appeals and obtaining stay on proceedings, the object and purpose of the enactment of Section 138 of the N.I. Act was being frustrated, the Parliament has thought it fit to amend Section 148 of the N.I. Act, by which the first appellate Court, in an appeal challenging the order of conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, is conferred with the power to direct the convicted accused - appellant to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court. By the amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act, it cannot be said that any vested right of appeal of the accused - appellant has been taken away and/or affected. Therefore, submission on behalf of the appellants that amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act shall not be made applicable retrospectively and more particularly with respect to cases/complaints filed prior to 1.9.2018 shall not be applicable has no substance and cannot be accepted, as by amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act, no substantive right of appeal has been taken away and/or affected.. Therefore the decisions of this Court in the cases of Garikapatti Veeraya (supra) and Videocon International Limited (supra), relied upon by the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants shall not be applicable to the facts of the case on hand. Therefore, considering the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act stated hereinabove, on purposive interpretation of Section 148 of the N.I. Act as amended, we are of the opinion that Section 148 of the N.I. Act as amended, shall be applicable in respect of the appeals against the order of conviction and sentence for the

offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, even in a case where the criminal complaints for the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act were filed prior to amendment Act No. 20/2018 i.e., prior to 01.09.2018. If such a purposive interpretation is not adopted, in that case, the object and purpose of amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act would be frustrated. Therefore, as such, no error has been committed by the learned first appellate court directing the appellants to deposit 25% of the amount of fine/compensation as imposed by the learned trial Court considering Section 148 of the N.I. Act, as amended.

¶9Now so far as the submission on behalf of the appellants that even considering the language used in Section 148 of the N.I. Act as amended, the appellate Court "may" order the appellant to deposit such sum which shall be a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial Court and the word used is not "shall" and therefore the discretion is vested with the first appellate court to direct the appellant - accused to deposit such sum and the appellate court has construed it as mandatory, which according to the learned Senior Advocate for the appellants would be contrary to the provisions of Section 148 of the N.I. Act as amended is concerned, considering the amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act as a whole to be read with the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the amending Section 148 of the N.I. Act, though it is true that in amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act, the word used is "may", it is generally to be construed as a "rule" or "shall" and not to direct to deposit by the appellate court is an exception for which special reasons are to be assigned. Therefore amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act confers power upon the Appellate Court to pass an order pending appeal to direct the Appellant Accused to deposit the sum which shall not be less than 20% of the fine or compensation either on an application filed by the original complainant or even on the application filed by the Appellant Accused under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence. The aforesaid is required to be construed considering

the fact that as per the amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act, a minimum of 20% of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court is directed to be deposited and that such amount is to be deposited within a period of 60 days from the date of the order, or within such further period not exceeding 30 days as may be directed by the appellate court for sufficient cause shown by the appellant. Therefore, if amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act is purposively interpreted in such a manner it would serve the Objects and Reasons of not only amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act, but also Section 138 of the N.I. Act. Negotiable Instruments Act has been amended from time to time so as to provide, inter alia, speedy disposal of cases relating to the offence of the dishonoured 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, the Parliament has thought it fit to amend Section 148 of the N.I. Act. Therefore, such a purposive interpretation would be in furtherance of the Objects and Reasons of the amendment in Section 148 of the N.I. Act and also Sec 138 of the N.I. Act.

¶10Now so far as the submission on behalf of the appellants, relying upon Section 357(2) of the Cr.P.C. that once the appeal against the order of conviction is preferred, fine is not recoverable pending appeal and therefore such an order of deposit of 25% of the fine ought not to have been passed and in support of the above reliance placed upon the decision of this Court in the case of Dilip S. Dhanukar (supra) is concerned, the aforesaid has no substance. The opening word of amended Section 148 of the N.I. Act is that "notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure.....". Therefore irrespective of the provisions of Section 357(2) of the Cr.P.C., pendingoappealobeforeotheofirstoappellateocourt,ochallengingotheo orderoofoconvictionoandosentenceounderoSectiono138ooofotheoN.I.o Act,otheoappellateocourtoisoconferredowithotheopowerotoodirectotheo appellantotoodepositosuchosumopendingoappealowhichoshallobeoao minimumoofo20%oofotheofineoorocompensationoawardedobyotheo trialoCourt."o o o FromoperusaloofotheoaboveoreferredojudgmentoinoSurinderoSingho Deswal'socaseo(supra),oitoisoobservedothatotheoapplicabilityoofotheoprovisiono underoSectiono148oofotheoN.IoAct,o1881oisomandatory.oFurther,oSectiono148oofo theoN.I.oAct,o1881oenvisagesodepositoofominimumo20%oamountoandoSectiono 148o ofo theo N.I.o Act,o 1881o startso witho ao nono obstanteo clause.o Thus,o theo contentionoofolearnedocounseloforotheopetitionerothatoprovisionsocontainedoino Sectiono148oofotheoN.IoAct,o1881oareodirectoryoandonotomandatory,oisoherebyo rejected.o o o Further,o Hon'bleo theo Apexo Courto ino theo secondo roundo ofo litigation,o ino theo aboveo referredo Surindero Singho Deswal'so caseo (supra)o furtheroconsideredotheoissue,owhereotheosuspensionoofosentenceowasosubjectotoo theoconditionoofodepositoofo25%oofotheoamountoofocompensationoandowheno theo conditiono foro suspensiono ofo sentenceo waso noto compliedo with,o theo concernedoAdditionaloSessionsoJudge,ohadotakenotheoviewothatotheoorderoofo suspensionoofosentenceoshallobeodeemedotoohaveobeenovacatedoandotheoHigho Courto hado upheldo theo viewo ofo learnedo Additionalo Sessionso Judge.o Accordingly,otheoHon'bleoApexoCourtoinoSurinderoSinghoDeswalo@oCol.o S.S.oDeswalo&oOrs.ovsoVirenderoGandhio&oAnr.o2020(1)ooR.C.R.o(Criminal)oo 604,oheldoasoundero:-o oo "13.o Theo secondo roundo ofo litigationo whicho waso initiatedo byo theo appellanto byo filingo applicationo undero Sectiono482oCr.P.C.,o1973owasoagainstotheoorderodatedo GURPREET KAUR 20.07.2019o passedo byo theo Additionalo Sessionso Judge,o PanchkulaobyowhichoAdditionaloSessionsoJudgeoheldothato theo appellanto havingo noto compliedo witho theo directiono datedo 01.12.2018o too deposito 25%o ofo theo amounto ofo compensation,otheoorderoofosuspensionoofosentenceoshallo beo deemedo too haveo beeno vacated.o Theo ordero datedo

20.07.2019o waso ano ordero passedo byo theo Additionalo SessionsoJudgeoonoaccountoofofailureoofotheoappellantotoo deposito 25%o ofo theo amounto ofo compensation.o Theo suspensionoofosentenceoono01.12.2018owasosubjectotootheo conditiono ofo deposito ofo 25%o ofo theo amounto ofo compensation,o wheno theo conditiono foro suspensiono ofo sentenceo waso noto compliedo with,o learnedo Additionalo SessionsoJudgeowasorightoinotakingotheoviewothatoorderoofo suspensiono ofo sentenceo shallo beo deemedo too haveo beeno vacated.oChallengeotooorderodatedo20.07.2019ohasorightlyo beenorepelledobyotheoHighoCourtobyoitsoelaborateoandowello consideredojudgmentodatedo10.09.2019.o …ooooo18.o…oWhenosuspensionoofosentenceobyotheotrialo courtoisograntedoonoaocondition,ononocomplianceoofotheo conditiono haso adverseo effecto ono theo continuanceo ofo suspensionoofosentence.oTheoCourtowhichohasosuspendedo theo sentenceo ono ao condition,o aftero noticingo non-complianceoofotheoconditionocanoveryowelloholdothatotheo suspensiono ofo sentenceo standso vacatedo dueo too non-compliance.oTheoorderoofotheoAdditionaloSessionsoJudgeo declaringo thato dueo too non-complianceo ofo conditiono ofo deposito ofo 25%o ofo theo amounto ofo compensation,o suspensionoofosentenceostandsovacatedoisowellowithinotheo jurisdictionoofotheoSessionsoCourtoandonooerrorohasobeeno committedobyotheoAdditionaloSessionsoJudgeoinopassingo theoorderodatedo20.07.2019.o o o 19.o ItoisoforotheoAppellateoCourtowhoohasograntedo suspensionoofosentenceotootakeocalloononon-complianceoando takeoappropriateodecision.oWhatoorderoisotoobeopassedobyo theo Appellateo Courto ino sucho circumstanceso iso foro theo Appellateo Courto too considero ando decide.o However,o non-complianceoofotheoconditionoofosuspensionoofosentenceoiso sufficientotoodeclareosuspensionoofosentenceoasohavingobeeno vacated."o o o Further,o ino somewhato similaro circumstances,o ao Co-ordinateo BenchoofothisoCourtoinoHarwinderoSinghovsoMohanLalooo2022(1)ooR.C.R.oo (Criminal)o136,ooframedootheofollowingoquestiono:-o

7.oo xxxo o o xxxo Q.o Whethero whileo suspendingo theo sentenceo ofo theo applicant/convict,otheoAppellateoCourtoinoanoappealoagainsto convictionounderosectiono138oofotheoN.I.oAct,ocanoimposeoao conditiono thato ono non-deposito ofo minimumo ofo twentyo percento ofo theo fine/compensationo awardedo byo theo trialo court,oasoorderedobyotheoAppellateocourtowhileoexercisingo itsopowersounderosectiono148oofotheoNIoAct,otheobenefitoofo suspensiono ofo sentenceo wouldo beo liableo too beo automatically/consequentlyovacated?o o o o AfterodiscussingotheolawoonoSectiono148oofotheoN.I.oAct,o1881,oito wasoheldoinoparaoNo.19oofoHarwinderoSingh'socaseo(supra)oasoundero:-o o o "19.o Thato theo Appellateo Courto ino ano appealo againstoconvictionounderoSectiono138oofotheoN.IoAct,owhileo suspendingotheosentenceoofotheoAppellant/Convict,ohasotheo powero too imposeo aoconditiono thato ono non-deposito ofo theo fine/compensation,o theo benefito ofo suspensiono ofo sentenceo wouldo beo liableo too beo automatically/consequentlyo vacated."o o o SimilaroviewohasobeenotakenobyothisoCourtoinoM/soWhiteoHorseo NetworkoServicesoPvt.oLtd.o&oAnr.ovsoStateoofoHaryanao&oAnr.o(CRM-M-60897-2022odecidedoono04.01.2023.o o o Ino viewo ofo theo aforesaido discussion,o thereo iso noo forceo ino theo submissionsoofolearnedocounseloforotheopetitionerothatotheoAppellateoCourto whileograntingobail,ocannotomakeoitosubjectotoocomplianceoofodirectionotoo deposito ao parto ofo compensationo amounto awardedo byo theo trialo Court,o aso providedounderoSectiono148oofotheoN.IoAct,o1881.oo o o Accordingly,o thiso Courto doeso noto seeo anyo reasono too interfereo withotheoimpugnedoorderodatedo29.09.2022o(AnnexureoP-1)opassedobyotheo learnedo Additionalo Sessionso Judge,o Faridabad.o Thereo iso noo illegalityo oro perversityo ino theo ordero datedo 29.09.2022o (Annexureo P-1)o ando theopresento petitionobeingodevoidoofoanyomerit,oisoherebyodismissed.o o o Februaryo16,o2023o o o o o (HARSHoBUNGER)o gurpreeto o o o o o o o JUDGEo Whetherospeaking/reasoned:o o Yes/Noo Whetheroreportable:o o o Yes/No