1 S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 468/2009 Devashish Bose vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Date of order : 05.03.2010 HON'BLE MR. MAHESH BHAGWATI, J. Mr. R.D. Sharma, for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Shukla, for the respondent. Mr. G.S. Fauzdar, Public Prosecutor for the State. By way of this criminal misc. petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner Devashish Bose has prayed to quash the order dated 28th June, 2007 passed by the Additional Session Judge, No.7, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Criminal Revision No. 50/2007 whereby, the learned Sessions Judge set aside the order dated 22nd August, 2006 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 11, Jaipur City, Jaipur, who convicted the petitioner in the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 2,50,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo six months simple imprisonment. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material available on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has canvassed that he was prepared to deposit Rs. 2,50,000/- in the Court, hence, the orders may be passed accordingly. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has 2 defended the impugned order. 5. Having reflected over the submissions made at the bar and carefully scanned the relevant material on record, it is noticed that Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.11, Jaipur City, Jaipur after convicting the petitioner in the offence under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentencing him to a fine of Rs. 2,50,000/- directed him to deposit Rs. 50,000/- fine on 9th October, 2006 and rest of the amount of fine in eight equal installments of Rs. 25,000/-. It is also found that the Additional Session Judge, No. 7, Jaipur City, Jaipur in his revisional jurisdiction, set aside the order dated 22nd August, 2006 and remitted the case back to the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.11, Jaipur City, Jaipur directing him to pass an order of sentence again afresh in accordance with the provisions of law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to both the parties. 6. It is relevant to record that the order dated 22nd August, 2006 directing the accused petitioner to deposit the amount of fine in eight equal installments of Rs. 25,000/-, ex- facie seems to be illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 424 of Cr.P.C., which relates to suspension of execution of sentence of imprisonment. 3 7. Sub-section (1)(a) of Section 424 of Cr.P.C. envisages: “424. Suspension of execution of sentence of imprisonment.-(1) When an offender has been sentenced to fine only and to imprisonment in default of payment of the fine and the fine is not paid forthwith, the Court may- (a)order that the fine shall be payable either in fully on or before a date not more than thirty days from the date of the order, or in two or three installments, of which the first shall be payable on or before a date not more than thirty days from the date of the order and the other or others at an interval or at intervals, as the case may be, of not more than thirty days;” 8. It is clear from the aforesaid provision that the court could order the accused to pay the amount of fine in two or three installments but not more than that. In the instant case, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.11 allowed the accused petitioner to pay the amount of fine of Rs. 2,50,000/-, initially 50,000/- on 9th October, 2006 and rest of the amount of fine in eight equal installments of Rs. 25,000/-. The impugned order dated 28th June, 2007 is found to be just and proper passed in accordance with the provisions of law. Learned Session Judge rightly set aside the order of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, No.11 and correctly directed him to pass the order of sentence afresh, in accordance 4 with the provisions of law. The impugned order dated 28th June, 2009 does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and the same warrants no intervention. 9. For the reasons stated above, the criminal misc. petition being devoid of merits deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. Mak/- 108