FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.229 OF 2009 IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1577 OF 2008 [ V/S.] _____________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Coram, appearances, Court s orders : ’ or directions and Registrar s’ : Court s or Judge s orders ’ ’ orders : _____________________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 8th JANUARY, 2010. PC :- 1. Heard. 2. The applicant is a private limited company which has filed the petition in this Court which was dismissed in default. This application is for restoration. After hearing parties at some length and finding that sufficient cause is made out for restoration of the petition dismissed in default, the application is allowed. Petition is restored to file and placed for admission forthwith. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J.) FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1577 OF 2008 [ V/S.] _____________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Coram, appearances, Court s orders : ’ or directions and Registrar s’ : Court s or Judge s orders ’ ’ orders : _____________________________________________________________________________________ CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 8th JANUARY, 2010. PC :- 1. This petition is directed against an order passed by the Lower Appellate Court wherein the lower appellate court has as a pre-condition for the petitioner s application for suspension of sentence ’ to be granted directed deposit of 30% of the compensation amount. 2. The petitioner applicant could not comply with that condition and that is how the sentence was not suspended but the appeal is kept pending. 3. It is stated that during the pendency of the matter before the additional sessions Judge the application for extension was also made which also has been disallowed. 4. The petition challenges imposition of condition to pay 30% of compensation as a pre-condition to suspend the sentence. It is stated across the bar that now an amount of Rs.5,13,000/- lakhs has been deposited in the lower appellate court. 5. These are the proceedings under section 138 of Negotiations Instruments Act. The Act itself stipulates that a sentence of imprisonment apart, even a direction to pay the cheque amount can be issued in the form of compensation. Therefore, I do not find that the lower appellate court has committed any error or perversity in directing deposit of 30% of the amount which is just and fair considering the peculiar facts of this case. Now, applicant s conduct is put in issue ’ and it is stated that even after restoration beyond the said deposit of Rs.1,50,000/- nothing has been paid and the pendency of the application for restoration is being used as a delaying tactic. Therefore, no equitable and discretionary relief be granted. Having perused the petition and the annexures thereto so also hearing Counsel, I am satisfied that interest of justice would be served if the sentence is suspended by directing payment of Rs.10 lakhs within a period of eight weeks from today. If the said amount is deposited and proof produced before the lower appellate court, the sentence shall stand suspended accordingly, and thereafter, appeal may be taken up for hearing and disposed of expeditiously. Needless to add that no further extension will be granted and in default sentence will not be suspended any further, nor would the appeal be heard on merits. (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)