A.K UNNIKRISHNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner is the appellant in Crl.A.No.452/2023 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court, Muvattupuzha. He assails the order dtd. 18/1/2023 issued in Crl.M.P.No.331/2023, in the above appeal, directing deposit of 20% of the fine amount under Sec. 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short' the NI Act').

(2.) Sri. Shiju Varghese, the learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently contended that the impugned order has not referred to the contentions advanced, especially with regard to the agreement, copy of which is produced as Annexure-A6. The learned counsel further submitted that a legally enforceable debt had not arisen as per the terms of the agreement, and therefore, the direction to deposit 20% of the fine amount is contrary to law. The learned counsel also submitted that the Supreme Court had in Jamboo Bandari v. M.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. [2023 (6) KHC 80] held that reasons had to be specified for imposing conditions under Sec. 148 of the NI Act and in Baiju v.State of Kerala [2024 (1) KLT 196], a learned Single Judge of this Court had also held that reasons must be specified while imposing conditions under Sec. 148 of the NI Act. The learned counsel submitted that the impugned order does not reflect any reason for directing such a deposit, and hence the impugned order is liable to be set aside.

(3.) I have heard Sri. Noushad.K.A, the learned Public Prosecutor as well.