Karnataka High Court
Sri.Kristappa @ Krishnappa, S/O B ... vs M/S.Sriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. on 13 August, 2009
Author: Jawad Rahim
Bench: Jawad Rahim
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY or-' AUc;Us'r.__2.i$D'9"'.' D. BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUsT1cI$,_.JAwAD CRAHCIVIH' 7 CRIMINAL PE'r1'r1oN-..;\ro.7'67f6',*zoo9' L} BETWEEN: 'V 2 V' I V Sri. Kristappa Alias KrisI1néippa--'_ . " S/0.13. Sunkappa * C' Aged about 45 years R/0. Near Manganima Tefrnplé _ V_ Toranagal, SancIurT-aiL1kV3~C _ Bellary Dist. " D" A 1 _ .1: » C PETITIONER [By Sri. Sh.i.VVafa_j_a'I-5fi1j¢1na.th,__Ad'v'.}......,_ AND: M/s. Srirarri'Trar1sVDQraf.'. " C Finance _Co. L"td._, _ . Rep. hjv its.GPA I-'I0.l.der A' R, B;-.DR'1-an.1eshD.1.3abu """ S,/ 0.. _Ramanjineyulu RB. "Ag<*::iC about C28"3r.¢a:js Junib: % ' V " Srirarn Tra_nsp.ort Co., Ltd., V C' _ Officé"---situ'atev# 2-A Sita Ramalfilivas .4 H " ' = Road; Bellary . .. RESPONDENT
fig, R) J RJ : CRL.P. 7676 I 2009 13.08.2009 THIS CRLP FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITEONER PRAYENG THATv~._Tljll'S HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH PART' _ OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER DT. 08.06.2009 _'PPISSED:"' THE CRL.A.NO.82/2009 BY THE HoN'BLE'.,EAST'TRACK'--« COURT II, BELLARY, VIDE ANNEXURE...I3, DIRECTIHG' PETITIONER TO DEPOSIT A SUM 'OF RS.j;I,'*;t5;*oA00_/;~..AS CONDITION PRECEDENT FOR THE. STAY OF} OPERATION OF THE oRDER.___ oF"A.VC'ONvICTIVONV ANDI SENTENCE PASSED BY THE I"AI3I)ITION.AL--V.cIVII;;JUDGE (JR. DN.) 85 JMFC, BELLARY, IN Cic, E=IQ.101'0/2007}DATED 06.05.2009 IMPOSED ON THE RETITIjON'E_R. THIS CRL.P COMINC OiNI§O'I~*: AOIVIISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THEZFGLLOW'-INS: ' The, petitioneria' v«cionxIi~:ted accused. He Suffered conviction Io: offeVnvceS--._I1n"icler Section 138 of Negotiable ..InSt:§IIfnen.tS..Act ('hereinafter referred to as 'N.I. Act' for Short N.o}I0vI0'/-.2007 on the file of I Additional Civil Judge (Jr..Dn.l) Bellary. Aggrieved by which he preferred 'Can appealpnrier Section 374 of Cr.P.C which is registered in "iAppeal No.82/ 2009 and is pending on the file of Fast Track Court II, Bellary. In the appeal he has " filed an application under Section 389 Cr.P.C requesting the W Court to suspend the sentence passed by the Trial Court in QC l\§o.1010/2007 dated 06.05.2009.
2. The learned Appellate Judge though suspende_d-«th-.e sentence passed by the Trial Court, has substantial condition that petitioner .'s"h'all:f'..pdep'osit__l '* Rs.1,75,000/-- failing which the order'regarding.'sentence'--yvi'i3;Vi_Al be revoked. Aggrieved by the .said ordler_,l"the peltitiolnper has filed this petition under Sectionilii"[email protected]$'.2.\R/vif'Sectionlfg389 (2) Cr.P.C.
3. Heard.
4.:'i.t_Undoubted-1y," exercised by the learned Sessions Judge is lundelr 389(1) of Cr.P.C which does V not mandate thatyyhen direction to pay a fine forms part of the,_spientelnice_,: such a fine has to be deposited or direction to deposit su:e'h._ani'V'an1ount is must. °.VP§ar'ticularly, in the case of Section 138 of Ni. Act, will be part of the sentence or the sentence itself may _l -_cC.jtnprilse only fine. Even in such cases, the order directing pgalyv the convicted accused to deposit either the entire amount of fine or substantial portion of the same is not compulsvory-;«_<_iInv this View of the matter, the direction of the Appeilate' . directing the petitioner to deposit Rs.V1M,f7b5,OO(}/"'conditi.on.v' to suspend the sentence is set aside_'.=.. :'F1iirrth-er,' direction in the present case toiapajr on recovery as compensation to itiifiwill be appropriate to direct to_'».dQrpgsit of the amount covered under be the only move regarding2_sué;p.e'n sion of"sent'enc'e'." He_n_<:eV disposed of at the admission stage itself wi'th.o1}it'notice"to&'t'he' respondent. 1 £3 Sd/-