RAVI KHANNA Vs. INDERPAL SURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition has been preferred against the order dtd. 17/12/2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, in case bearing CIS No.CRA/206/2024 titled as 'Ravi Khanna Vs. Inderpal Suri through his LRs etc.'' in the proceedings initiated under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'N.I. Act') by the respondent(s), whereby the petitioner was directed to deposit 20% of the compensation amount awarded by learned trial Court on the next date of hearing i.e. 8/1/2025 and also directed the petitioner to deliver his passport to the Court immediately on or before the next date of hearing i.e. 8/1/2025, failing which his bail/surety bonds shall be cancelled, with a further direction to send his passport to the passport authority for taking appropriate action under Sec. 10(3) of the Passports Act, 1967.

(2.) In brief, facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the respondent(s) against the petitioner under Sec. 138 of N.I. Act on the allegation that the parties were having friendly relations. In the month of January, 2020, on the asking of the petitioner, the complainant advanced him a friendly loan of Rs.8.00 lacs for his personal needs. The petitioner assured the complainant to repay the said loan in the month of July, 2020. When the complainant demanded his money back, the petitioner issued a cheque bearing No.399868 dtd. 17/7/2020 amounting to Rs.8.00 lacs with an assurance that the same will be encashed on presentation in the bank. However, when the complainant presented the aforesaid cheque for clearing with his bank on 17/7/2020, the same was returned vide memo dtd. 18/7/2020 with the remarks 'Funds Insufficient'. Thereafter, the complainant served a legal notice dtd. 21/7/2020 through registered post on 22/7/2020 to the petitioner to make the payment within a period of 15 days, but the petitioner failed to discharge his legal liability. The respondent-complainant filed a complaint under Sec. 138 of NI Act, in which the petitioner stood convicted by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar, vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 3/7/2024 and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months along with default mechanism and further to pay compensation to the tune of cheque amount along with simple interest @9% per annum. Against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the petitioner preferred an appeal before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, who, vide impugned order dtd. 17/12/2024, directed him to pay 20% of the compensation amount before the next date of hearing i.e. 8/1/2025 and also directed the petitioner to deliver his passport to the Court immediately on or before the next date of hearing i.e. 8/1/2025, failing which his bail/surety bonds shall be cancelled, with a further direction to send his passport to the passport authority for taking appropriate action under Sec. 10(3) of the Passports Act, 1967. Against this order, the petitioner approached this Court by way of instant petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that imposition of condition to deposit 20% of the compensation amount is unjust and arbitrary and against the proposition of law settled in the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari Vs. MP Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. and others, 2013 (12) SCALE 611 and Muskan Enterprises and another Vs. The State of Punjab and another, Criminal Appeal No.5491 of 2024, arising out of SLP (CrL) No.8072 of 2024, decided on 19/12/2024, wherein it is held that deposit of minimum 20% of the compensation amount is not an absolute rule. It is further contended that deposit of 20% of the compensation amount cannot be a condition precedent and learned Appellate Court ought to have considered the exceptional circumstances for waiving off the said condition. With regard to issue of direction to the passport authority by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar to take appropriate action under Sec. 10(3) of Act of 1967, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suresh Nanda Vs. CB1, 2008 (1) RCR (CrL) 897, of Madras High Court passed in Savita Kainya Vs. Arun Kumar Kainya, W.P. Nos.28760 and 28761 of 2015 and MP No.l of 2015, decided on 26/11/2015 and of this Court in Jaideep Singh Vs. Sahil Petroleum and another, 2020 (3) RCR (CrL) 571.