SEEMA M JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Taken up form final hearing by consent of parties.

(2.) The present petitioner is the accused in a case filed by the respondent No. 2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The trial court has convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to suffer two month of S.I. In addi tion, the present petitioner has been directed to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000 to the respondent No. 2 within a period of one month from the date of the order in default the petitioner to suffer S.I. for one month. Aggrieved by the order of conviction the present petitioner filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Kolhapur so also moved an application for suspension of the sentence. The Appellate Court did pass the order of suspending the sentence. However imposed a condition that the petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000 to wards compensation within a period of 15 days. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of inability on the part of the petitioner to deposit the amount of compensation, she is taken in custody and is detained in Yerwada Jail, Pune. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been lodged in jail for more than last about one month.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only for the reason that the petitioner is facing financial difficulty, the petitioner has not been able to deposit the amount. In his submission imposing of condition of deposit of Rs. 50,000 in the present case tent amount to refusing the bail when appeal is as of right. In all fairness, the learned counsel submits that the petitioner is in a position to deposit Rs. 10,000. The learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 supports the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge. Having regard to the fact that on account of inability to deposit Rs. 50,000, the petitioner has been detained in jail for last more than one month, requires intervention of this Court. I am of the clear view that the imposition of condition of Rs. 50,000 towards compensation in the facts of the present case is very harsh and strin gent condition which the petitioner is unable to comply with. In the result, I modify the order dated 21.11.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur and reduce the amount of deposit of Rs.50,000 towards compensation to Rs. 10,000. In the result, the sentence shall stands suspended on deposit of Rs. 10,000 by the petitioner with the Sessions Court towards part of the amount of compensation within a period of two weeks from today. Writ petition is thus disposed of. Rule made absolute in the above terms.