Rajendra Kumar Varun v. State of U.P. and another) under Section

: : G.A., Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State and Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2.

2. A joint statement has been made by learned counsel for the parties that they do not propose to file any affidavit and the application be decided on the basis of the documents available on record. With the consent of the parties, the application is being decided at the fresh stage.

3. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the impugned order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the Incharge Sessions Judge, Amroha in Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2025 (Rajendra Kumar Varun Vs. State of U.P. and another) under Section 138 N.I. Act arising out of Complaint Case No.2250 of 2023, passed by ACJM-I, Amroha, Police Station- Amroha Nagar, District-Amroha.

4. The case of the applicant is the post-loding of the complaint under Section 138 NI Act against the applicant by the opposite party no.2. The applicant came to be convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act in complaint case No.2250 of 2023 passed by the court of I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Amroha on 11.06.2025 while imprisonment of six months and fine to the tune of Rs.13,50,000/-, against which, the applicant preferred a criminal appeal no.87 of 2025, in which, on 09.07.2025, an order came to be passed by the court of In-charge Sessions Judge, Amroha requiring the applicant to deposit twenty per cent of the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/- being Rs.2,70,000/-.

5. Questioning the said order, insofar as it directs deposit of 20 per cent of an amount of Rs.13,50,000/-, the present application has been preferred.

6. This Court on 06.08.2025 proceeded to pass the following order : "1. Contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that post lodging of the proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act, the applicant came to be convicted by order dated 11.06.2025 by First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha in Complaint Case 2 NA528 No. 27285 of 2025 No. 2250 of 2023 whereby rigorous imprisonment of six months was ordered and the fine/compensation to the tune of Rs. 13,50,000/- was determined. The applicant herein, thereafter, preferred a Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 2025 (Rajendra Kumar Varun Vs. State of U.P.) along with an application for stay of the conviction and the sentence and recovery of the amount in question and the court below by virtue of the order dated 09.07.2025 proceeded to stay the conviction and recovery subject to deposit of 20% of the total amount of Rs. 13,50,000/- determined by the trial court in exercise of powers under Section 148 of the NI Act. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks to rely upon the judgment in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State Industrial development; 2023 (10) SCC 466 and Muskan Enterprises vs The State Of Punjab: 2024 INSC 1046 so as to contend that the court below had issued a blanket direction without considering the fact as to whether the case of the applicant falls under the exceptional category or not. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that as per the instructions received from his client the applicant is agreeable to deposit 10% of the total amount determined by the court below. 2. Matter requires consideration. 3. Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2. 4. Put up this case as fresh on 08.09.2025 at 2:00 P.M. 5. Till 08.09.2025, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in pursuance of the order dated 09.07.2025 requiring the applicant to deposit 20% of the total amount determined by the trial court to Rs. 13,50,000/- subject to deposit of 10% of the said amount by 27.08.2025. The proof of deposit be filed before the court below and also be annexed with supplementary affidavit. In case, the applicant fails to deposit the said amount within the period specified above, the interim protection shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. "

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that order dated 09.07.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2025 insofar as it directs payment of 20 per cent of the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/- cannot be sustained. Since, the case of the applicant whether it falls under the exceptional category as mandated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development 2023 (10) SCC 466 and Muskan Enterprises vs. State of Punjab 2024 INSC 1046 has not bee considered.

8. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 on instructions submit that there has been no consideration of the claim of the applicant whether it falls under the exceptional category or not. However, it submits that the order dated 09.07.2025 insofar as it directs for deposit of 20 per cent penalty be modified to 10 per cent since, the applicant has already deposited 10 per cent of the same.

9. I have heard these submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully.

10. Since, the order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the In-charge Sessions Judge, Amroha in Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2025 does not advert to the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari (supra) and Muskan Enterprises (supra) thus, the order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the application is being decided in the following terms : a) the order dated 09.07.2025 insofar as it directs deposit of 20 per cent of the compensation in exercise of the powers under Section 148 of the NI Act to the tune of Rs.2,70,000/- out of the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/- is modified to deposit the 10 per cent being Rs.1,35,000/-/ 3 NA528 No. 27285 of 2025

11. Since, a joint statement has been made by the counsel for the applicant as well as counsel for the opposite party no.2 that the appeal be decided strictly in accordance with law, thus, it is required that the court the appeal with most expedition without granting shall decide unnecessary adjournments and in case adjournments are granted, then the same should be on exceptional circumstances not beyond ten days at a stretch.

12. With the aforesaid observation, the application stands disposed of. It shall be open for the opposite party no.2 to apply for the release of the amount by filing an appropriate application before the trial court. September 8, 2025 Priya (Vikas Budhwar,J.) PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

: : G.A., Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Court No. - 75 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J.

1. Heard Sri Sunil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri S.K. Singh, learned AGA for the State and Sri Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no.2.

2. A joint statement has been made by learned counsel for the parties that they do not propose to file any affidavit and the application be decided on the basis of the documents available on record. With the consent of the parties, the application is being decided at the fresh stage.

3. This application u/s 528 of BNSS has been preferred to quash the impugned order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the Incharge Sessions Judge, Amroha in Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2025 (Rajendra Kumar Varun Vs. State of U.P. and another) under Section 138 N.I. Act arising out of Complaint Case No.2250 of 2023, passed by ACJM-I, Amroha, Police Station- Amroha Nagar, District-Amroha.

4. The case of the applicant is the post-loding of the complaint under Section 138 NI Act against the applicant by the opposite party no.2. The applicant came to be convicted under Section 138 of the NI Act in complaint case No.2250 of 2023 passed by the court of I Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Amroha on 11.06.2025 while imprisonment of six months and fine to the tune of Rs.13,50,000/-, against which, the applicant preferred a criminal appeal no.87 of 2025, in which, on 09.07.2025, an order came to be passed by the court of In-charge Sessions Judge, Amroha requiring the applicant to deposit twenty per cent of the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/- being Rs.2,70,000/-.

5. Questioning the said order, insofar as it directs deposit of 20 per cent of an amount of Rs.13,50,000/-, the present application has been preferred.

6. This Court on 06.08.2025 proceeded to pass the following order : "1. Contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that post lodging of the proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act, the applicant came to be convicted by order dated 11.06.2025 by First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha in Complaint Case 2 NA528 No. 27285 of 2025 No. 2250 of 2023 whereby rigorous imprisonment of six months was ordered and the fine/compensation to the tune of Rs. 13,50,000/- was determined. The applicant herein, thereafter, preferred a Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 2025 (Rajendra Kumar Varun Vs. State of U.P.) along with an application for stay of the conviction and the sentence and recovery of the amount in question and the court below by virtue of the order dated 09.07.2025 proceeded to stay the conviction and recovery subject to deposit of 20% of the total amount of Rs. 13,50,000/- determined by the trial court in exercise of powers under Section 148 of the NI Act. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks to rely upon the judgment in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State Industrial development; 2023 (10) SCC 466 and Muskan Enterprises vs The State Of Punjab: 2024 INSC 1046 so as to contend that the court below had issued a blanket direction without considering the fact as to whether the case of the applicant falls under the exceptional category or not. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that as per the instructions received from his client the applicant is agreeable to deposit 10% of the total amount determined by the court below. 2. Matter requires consideration. 3. Issue notice to the opposite party no. 2. 4. Put up this case as fresh on 08.09.2025 at 2:00 P.M. 5. Till 08.09.2025, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in pursuance of the order dated 09.07.2025 requiring the applicant to deposit 20% of the total amount determined by the trial court to Rs. 13,50,000/- subject to deposit of 10% of the said amount by 27.08.2025. The proof of deposit be filed before the court below and also be annexed with supplementary affidavit. In case, the applicant fails to deposit the said amount within the period specified above, the interim protection shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. "

7. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that order dated 09.07.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2025 insofar as it directs payment of 20 per cent of the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/- cannot be sustained. Since, the case of the applicant whether it falls under the exceptional category as mandated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari Vs. M.P. State Industrial Development 2023 (10) SCC 466 and Muskan Enterprises vs. State of Punjab 2024 INSC 1046 has not bee considered.

8. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 on instructions submit that there has been no consideration of the claim of the applicant whether it falls under the exceptional category or not. However, it submits that the order dated 09.07.2025 insofar as it directs for deposit of 20 per cent penalty be modified to 10 per cent since, the applicant has already deposited 10 per cent of the same.

9. I have heard these submissions so made across the bar and perused the record carefully.

10. Since, the order dated 09.07.2025 passed by the In-charge Sessions Judge, Amroha in Criminal Appeal No.87 of 2025 does not advert to the mandate of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Jamboo Bhandari (supra) and Muskan Enterprises (supra) thus, the order cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the application is being decided in the following terms : a) the order dated 09.07.2025 insofar as it directs deposit of 20 per cent of the compensation in exercise of the powers under Section 148 of the NI Act to the tune of Rs.2,70,000/- out of the total amount of Rs.13,50,000/- is modified to deposit the 10 per cent being Rs.1,35,000/-/ 3 NA528 No. 27285 of 2025

11. Since, a joint statement has been made by the counsel for the applicant as well as counsel for the opposite party no.2 that the appeal be decided strictly in accordance with law, thus, it is required that the court the appeal with most expedition without granting shall decide unnecessary adjournments and in case adjournments are granted, then the same should be on exceptional circumstances not beyond ten days at a stretch.

12. With the aforesaid observation, the application stands disposed of. It shall be open for the opposite party no.2 to apply for the release of the amount by filing an appropriate application before the trial court. September 8, 2025 Priya (Vikas Budhwar,J.) PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad