(1.) ON 5th May, 2009 the learned counsel appearing for the parties were put to notice that this petition will be disposed of finally at the admission stage. Accordingly. the submissions have been heard of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent as well as learned Public Prosecutor for the State
(2.) THE petitioner was arraigned as a accused in a complaint filed by the first respondent alleging commission of offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "the saio act" ). By the judgment and order dated 03rd october 2008, the learned Judicial Magistrate, first Class, at Niphad convicted the petitioner for commission of offence under section 138 of the said Act. The petitioner was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 10. 00 lakhs. In default of payment of fine, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days out of the fine amount of Rs. 10. 00 lakhs, a sum of Rs. 9. 00 lakhs was ordered to be paid to the first respondent.
(3.) THE petitioner was taken in custody on passing the order of conviction. An appeal against the order of conviction was preferred by the petitioner. In the appeal an application was made by the petitioner under section 389 (1) of the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Code" ). An order was passed on the said application at Exhibit-4 on 8th October, 2008 by the learned Ad-hoc Additional Sessions judge, Niphad. By the said order the learned judge stayed the execution of sentence on the petitioner depositing 50% of the fine amount immediately and the remaining amount within fifteen days. The petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on bail only on deposit of 50% of the fine amount.