IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Crl.MC.No. 4039 of 2009() ------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12/11/2009 IN CRMP.3185/2009 IN CRA.383/2009 of SESSIONS COURT, KOLLAM ST.NO.84/2009 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT IV,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER/APPELLANT: --------------------------------------------------------------- SHAJI.C., THARAVATTU VEEDU, MATHILIL P.O., KADAVOOR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR.C.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. STATE BANK OF INDIA, KADAVOOR BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, M.R. SYAM NAIR. R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR. P.A. SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.NO.4039 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 14th December 2009 O R D E R Petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Crl.A.383/2009 was filed challenging the conviction and sentence. Crl.M.P.3185/2009 was filed to suspend the sentence. By Annexure-A1 order learned Sessions Judge directed the petitioner to deposit half of the cheque amount within one month for suspending the sentence. This petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure to quash said condition contending that learned Sessions Judge should not have directed the petitioner to deposit fifty percentage of the amount for Crmc 4039/09 2 suspending the sentence. 2. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner relying on the decision of the Supreme court in Stanny Felix Pinto v. Jangid Builders Pvt. Ltd and another (AIR 2001 SC 659) argued that when fine amount was Rs.20,00,000/- their Lordships directed to deposit only Rs.4,00,000/- which would be only 1/5th of the amount and when the cheque is for Rs.1,50,000/- direction to deposit 50% of the amount is harsh. Relying on the decision of Andhra Pradesh High Court in AMI Sanag Micromation v. State of A.P (2001 (1) KLJ 409) learned counsel argued that condition to deposit Rs.25,000/- itself was found to be unreasonable. 3. Learned counsel submitted that if petitioner is directed to deposit huge Crmc 4039/09 3 amount, he cannot avail the benefit of suspension of the sentence. I find no reason whatsoever, to interfere with the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge. Learned Sessions Judge was justified in directing to deposit a portion of the amount covered by the cheque, for suspending the sentence. Direction to deposit 50% of the cheque amount is the discretion of the appellate court. Supreme court has not held that only 1/5th of the amount covered by the cheque could be directed to be deposited. On the other hand, it is stated that if the amount to be deposited is huge, such portion shall not be directed to be deposited. Even Rs.4,00,000/- was found to be not a huge amount, by the Apex court. In such circumstances, if the petitioner wants to Crmc 4039/09 4 suspend the sentence, portion of the amount as directed by the learned Sessions Judge is to be deposited. If the case of the petitioner is that he is not in a position to deposit the amount, because of his financial condition, he is at liberty to approach the learned Sessions Judge to dispose the appeal at the earliest without suspending the sentence. As the period to deposit the amount fixed by the learned Sessions Judge is over, petitioner is granted three weeks time from today to deposit the amount. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.