1 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1666 OF 2009 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. D.A. Patil i/b Mr. A.K. Suryawanshi for the petitioner. Mr. S.V. Gajare, A.P.P. for the State. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, JJ. DATE : 7TH NOVEMBER 2009 P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner has been convicted and sentenced under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner filed an appeal 2 before the Court of Sessions and therein made an application for suspension of the sentence and fine during the pendency of appeal. The application was partly allowed and the sentence and fine was suspended subject to his depositing 50% of the amount of fine/compensation in the court. That order is impugned in this writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Sessions Judge erred in exercising the discretion of directing him to deposit 50% of the amount of fine/ compensation. The petitioner had deposited Rs.50,000/­ in the Court out of the total fine of Rs.3,00,000/­ and the Sessions Judge ought to have considered that amount as sufficient for suspending the sentence. 4. I do not see any error in the discretion exercised by the learned Sessions Judge in directing deposit of 50% of the amount. In any 3 event, in writ jurisdiction this Court cannot substitute its discretion for the discretion exercised by the learned Sessions Judge in the absence of any perversity or manifest error in the order. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the time for payment is extended by 6 weeks from today. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)