IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CRMMO No.250 of 2010 Date of decision : January 7, 2011 Hari Krishan …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. …Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surjit Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Bimal Gupta, Advocate. For the Respondent : None. Surjit Singh, J (Oral) Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner, who has been convicted of an offence, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and sentenced, is aggrieved by the conditional order of suspension of sentence, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, whereby it has been directed that he (the petitioner) shall deposit 50% of the compensation money, within a period of one month. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner being a poor person, it is not possible for him to pay even the 50% amount of compensation, which is equivalent to the amount of the cheque and that instead of requiring him to pay the money, in cash, a direction may be given for furnishing security of landed property. It may not be desirable to accede to this Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? …2… submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, this much concession is given to the petitioner that instead of depositing the money, in cash, he may furnish bank guarantee, equivalent to the 50% amount of compensation money. With this additional concession, the present petition is disposed of. Copy dasti. January 7, 2011(sd) ( Surjit Singh ), J