1 2 revn 362.09.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION srk CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.362 OF 2009 Dilip Maruti Kamble ..Applicant. v/s. Brahman Nagari Co-op. Pat Sanstha Ltd. & Anr. ..Respondents. .... Mr. Umesh R.Mankapure for the Applicant. Mr. Priten P.Killedar for the Respondent no.1. Ms. S.V.Gajare, A.P.P. for the Respondent no.2/State. .... CORAM : J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 16TH AUGUST, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2 The Respondent no.1 is the Co-operative Bank. The Respondent had filed a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the present Applicant as the cheque issued by him for payment of Rs.1,32,589/- was dishonoured and inspite of notice, the Applicant had failed to make the payment. Summary Criminal Case No. 563 of 2003 was registered. After trial, the trial court convicted the 2 2 revn 362.09.doc Applicant for the offence punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 1,35,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The trial court also directed that in case the amount was recovered, amount of Rs.1,32,589/-, being the cheque amount, be paid to the complainant by way of compensation. The Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2005 filed by the present Applicant also came to be dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangli by the impugned judgment dated 15th May, 2009. 4 Admittedly, the cheque was signed by the present Applicant, though according to him, it was one of the blank cheques given by him to the Bank as security in connection with loan taken by him. However, the courts below did not accept this contention. On merits I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence. 5 The learned counsel for the Applicant points out that the Applicant had deposited amount of Rs.10,000/- before the Sessions Court pending the Appeal and amount of Rs. 25,000/- 3 2 revn 362.09.doc before this Court and he is yet to pay Rs.1,00,000/- out of the fine amount. The learned counsel for the Respondent Bank has no objection if the Applicant is allowed to pay that amount in ten equal installments beginning with this month itself. 6 Therefore, the Revision Application stands dismissed. However, the Applicant/Accused is allowed to pay the balance amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in ten equal installments of Rs.10,000/- each beginning with 25th August, 2010. Each installment shall be paid on or before 25th day of the month. In view of this, the execution of sentence of imprisonment in default shall remain suspended. In case, the Applicant fails to pay any two installments, the Respondent shall be at liberty to approach the trial court with a request to issue warrant for arrest of the Applicant to undergo the sentence of imprisonment in default to pay the amount. The Respondent no.1 shall be at liberty to withdraw the amount deposited before the Sessions Court as well as this Court. 7 The Revision Application stands disposed of accordingly. [ J.H.BHATIA, J. ]