Summary
The Supreme Court upheld withdrawal of bail and suspension of sentence after the full amount promised to a cheque-dishonour complainant remained unpaid. A dispute between the two convicted directors about their respective shares did not bind the complainant or excuse breach of the court-recorded undertaking. Additional costs and surrender within four weeks were ordered.
Issues
- Whether the appellant’s claimed payment of his individual share prevented withdrawal of conditional bail and suspension of sentence when the total settlement remained unpaid.
- Whether the directors’ allocation dispute bound the complainant.
Held
- The complainant had agreed to accept a total settlement amount, but was not a party to the directors’ inter se arrangement allocating their shares. Their competing claims about equal liability, partnership percentages and prior payments did not bind him. The Court declined to determine how much each director individually owed. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17)
- The full promised amount remained unpaid, and the extension order expressly provided that interim protection would stand withdrawn on default. The appellant’s claim that he had paid his personal half-share did not establish infirmity in withdrawal of bail and suspension of sentence. The cheque-dishonour convictions were still under revision; this appeal addressed the withdrawal of interim protection. (¶¶ 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 17, 19, 20)
- Given the prolonged non-compliance and the complainant’s continued inability to obtain the promised payment, dismissal carried Rs.5 lakh costs payable to him within four weeks, additional to compensation. Both appellant and intervenor had to surrender within four weeks, with coercive execution if necessary. The High Court was to decide the pending revisions and applications and ensure compliance with the undertaking and suitable further compensation. (¶¶ 18, 19, 20)
Result
Appeal dismissed with Rs.5 lakh costs payable to the complainant within four weeks, not adjustable against compensation. Appellant and intervenor directed to surrender within four weeks; coercive execution to follow if they failed. Pending High Court revisions and applications were left for decision with directions to secure undertaking compliance and appropriate compensation.