GOVIND LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition assails the order dated 25.4.2012 of ASJ, Saket District Courts, New Delhi.

(2.) The petitioner was convicted by the M.M. under Section 138, N.I.Act and was sentenced to SI of six months and fine of Rs. 2,50,000/-. The entire fine amount was ordered to be paid as compensation to the complainant. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal to the court of ASJ, Saket Courts. The learned ASJ suspended the substantive sentence subject to the petitioner depositing the entire fine amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- with the Trial Court and on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount. It is this order of the ASJ that has been challenged in the present petition.

(3.) The petitioner challenges the impugned order of the ASJ and the order of the M.M. on two grounds. Firstly, that M.M. could not impose fine of Rs. 2,50,000/-. In this regard, it was submitted that as per Section 29 (2) CrPC, the M.M. could not impose fine exceeding Rs. 5000/-. The second ground for assailing the impugned order is that the learned ASJ erred in directing deposit of the entire fine amount while suspending the substantive sentence. In this regard, his submission was that if the appeal was found fit to be admitted for hearing, the sentence of fine as imposed was also necessarily to be suspended like the substantive sentence or in any case, the condition of deposit ought not be more than the one-third of the fine imposed or in any case, more than the cheque amount. In other words, the submission was that the condition of depositing the entire amount was harsh and onerous and incapable of compliance by the petitioner.