Summary
The appellate-deposit provision introduced by Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act applied to these post-amendment conviction appeals even though the complaints predated its commencement. It did not impair the substantive right of appeal. A deposit was treated as the ordinary rule, with departure requiring special reasons; the statutory minimum was 20%, and the ordered 25% was upheld. Four additional weeks were exceptionally allowed under Article 142.
Issues
- Whether Section 148 applied when complaints preceded the amendment but the appeals followed it.
- Whether deposit was discretionary and barred by Section 357(2) CrPC.
- Whether further deposit time should be granted.
Provisions considered
- Section 148, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881Applied to the appeals, permitting a minimum 20% deposit despite the older complaints and overriding the contrary CrPC objection. (¶ 7.2–10)
- Article 142, Constitution of IndiaExceptional further four weeks allowed for deposit in the particular circumstances. (¶ 11–12)
Held
- The appeals and suspension applications followed commencement on 1 September 2018. Applying Section 148 notwithstanding the earlier complaints fulfilled its object without taking away a substantive appeal right. (¶ 8–8.1)
- Although the provision used “may”, deposit was ordinarily to be directed and non-direction required special reasons. The sum ordered could not be less than 20%; the 25% direction was lawful. (¶¶ 9, 12)
- Section 148’s non obstante clause overrode the objection based on Section 357(2) CrPC to the appellate deposit. (¶ 10)
- The ordinary deposit period was 60 days with up to 30 further days for sufficient cause. The Court exceptionally granted four more weeks under Article 142 given bona fide litigation and the substantial amount. (¶ 11)
Result
Appeals dismissed; orders requiring deposit of 25% of the fine/compensation pending conviction appeals upheld. Appellants granted a further four weeks from judgment to deposit.