TARA CHAND DHAKAD Vs. RAM CHARAN LAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Tara Chand faced trial for offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the court of Judicial Magistrate No.7, Jaipur City, Jaipur and by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 24.9.2008 the trial Magistrate while convicting the petitioner under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has sentenced him to undergo one year's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,00,000/- to be paid to the complainant. Against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence the petitioner preferred an appeal before learned Additional Sessions Judge No.5, Jaipur City, Jaipur. While suspending execution of sentence by the order dated 5.1.2009, the appellate court ordered that execution of sentence shall remain suspended subjected to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- and on furnishing the required personal and surety bonds. Feeling aggrieved of the condition regarding deposit of Rs.5,00,000/-, the petitioner has filed this Misc. Petition.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned orders.

(3.) FOR suspension of execution of sentence a condition can be imposed by the appellate court but the condition should not be so harsh or exorbitant so as to it will become difficult for the accused to fulfil the same. Thus, imposition of such a harsh condition will restrain the petitioner from getting the benefit of suspension of execution of sentence. The condition of depositing Rs.5,00,000/- by the accused for suspension of execution of sentence is indeed a harsh condition. This Court in a series of cases has decided that for suspension of execution of sentence condition imposed should not be harsh and exorbitant.