IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.975 OF 2008. Shri Satish Ratanlal Malu ..Petitioner. versus Sagar Traders & Anr. ..Respondents. AND CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.976 OF 2008. Shri Satish Ratanlal Malu ..Petitioner. versus Prashant Traders & Anr. ..Respondents. .... Mr.Umesh R. Mankapure, for the Petitioner, in Crim.W.P.No.975/2008. Mr.A.M. Kulkarni, for the Respondent No.1., in Crim. W.P.No.975/2008. Mr. D.P.Adsule, APP, for the Respondent-State, in Crim.W.P.No.975/2008. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 17th September 2008. : 17th September 2008. : 17th September 2008. P.C.: 1. Perused the order dated 2nd May 2008 and 28th July 2008 passed by this Court. Considering the narrow controversy involved, the petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. In both the petitions , the petitioner is the accused who has been convicted on a private complaint filed by the first respondent under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as ’the said Act’). In the first petition, apart from substantive sentence, the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of : 2 : Rs.1,10,450/- by way of compensation to the original complainant. In the second case, he has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,73,472/- by way of compensation to the complainant. The petitioner has preferred two separate appeals. As a condition of suspending the substantive sentence, the petitioner has been directed to deposit the entire compensation amount by monthly instalments. These orders are challenged by filing the present petitions. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that in the writ petition no.975/2008, the petitioner has already deposited a sum of Rs.18,000/- with the Appellate Court and in the writ petition no.976/2008, the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs.24,000/- with the Appellate Court. On instructions, he states that in the first matter, he will deposit a further sum of Rs.37,000/- within a period of six weeks from today. He further states on instructions that in the writ petition no.976/2008, the petitioner will deposit a further amount of Rs.50,000/- within a period of six weeks from today. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent opposes the petition by submitting that the impugned orders have been passed on the basis of a concession made by the learned counsel appearing : 3 : for the petitioner before the Sessions Court. 2. Considering the mandate of law laid down in the case of D.S.Dahanukar v/s. Kotak Mahindra Co.Ltd. and another [ 2007(6) SCC 528 ], the Appellate Court can impose a condition of deposit of only a reasonable amount of compensation at the time of suspending the substantive sentence. If the amounts as stated by the learend advocate for the petitioner are deposited, the substantive sentence can be suspended till the final disposal of the appeal. Considering the amounts already deposited, the amounts offered to be deposited can be said to be reasonable in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court. 3. In the circumstances, the impugned orders will have to be modified and I pass the following orders :- (1) The order dated 2nd April 2008 passed in the criminal appeal no.119/2008 is modified by directing that the substantive sentence will remain suspended till the final disposal of the appeal, subject to the petitioner depositing further amount of Rs.37,000/- with the Appellate Court within the period of six weeks from today. : 4 : (2) The order dated 2nd April 2008 passed in criminal appeal no/.118/2008 is modified. The substantive sentence will remain suspended till the final disposal of the appeal subject to petitioner depositing with the Appellate Court a further amount of Rs.50,000/- within six weeks from today. (3) In the event, the petitioner fails to deposit the amounts as aforesaid within the stipulated time, it will be open for the first respondent to apply for appropriate relief. (4) Hearing of the appeals is expedited. The appeal shall be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and preferably on or before 31st January 2009. (A.S.Oka,J)