Khursheed Alam Khursheed Alam v. State of U.P. another)

1. Heard Sri Qazi Vakil Ahmad learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Kumar Rai learned State Law Officer for the State.

2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing the impugned order dated 25.08.2025 passed by the learned Court of Additional District & Session Judge, Room No.15 Prayagraj in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025 (Khursheed Alam @ Khursheed Alam Vs. State of U.P. & another).

3. The case of the applicant is that post lodging of a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act on 2.5.2025, the Court of Presiding Officer, Additional Court, N.I. Act, Court No.2, Prayagraj proceeded to convict the applicant in Complaint Case No. 4826 of 2016, while sentencing him for imprisonment of 9 months and payment of the fine Rs. 14,00,000/- and in case of non- payment of the same, further imprisonment of 3 months. Questioning the same, the applicant preferred Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025, Khursheed Alam @ Dr. Khursheed Alam v. State of U.P., in which on 14.5.2025, the applicant was accorded bail and the conviction, sentence, and the recovery was stayed subject to deposit of 25% of the total amount of the fine determined by the court below within 30 days. An application came to be preferred by the applicant on 23/24.7.2025, seeking a month's further time to make the deposit of the 25%. The said application came to be decided on

25.8.2025 by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Prayagraj, in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025, according 15 days' time to the applicant till 18.9.2025, to make the payment, otherwise on the failure of the 2 NA528 No. 34815 of 2025 same, the bail shall remain cancelled and the sentence shall come into operation.

4. Questioning the said order, the present application has been filed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that though the order, dated 25.8.2025 has challenged but the applicant is agreeable to deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- by 18.9.2025 and the best amount of Rs.2,50,000/- by 15.10.2025. He has further submitted that the wife of the applicant is ailing and she is not in a position to move and as her mobility has been paralysed and she needs urgent operation and the entire amount which the applicant could save is being spent towards the medical expenditure of the wife in that regard. He as per the specific instructions received from his client, submits that by 18.9.2025, the applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/ and by 15.10.2025, the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- would be deposited, making the satisfaction to the tune of 25% of the total amount of Rs.14,00,000/- being Rs.3,50,000/-. Learned counsel for the applicant has himself submitted as per the further instructions from the client that the said dates which have been committed by the applicant shall be honoured.

6. Learned State Law Officer on the other hand submits that the sword of conviction is hanging on the neck of the applicant and it is the applicant whose appeal is pending and the applicant himself has preferred an application for seeking time but he has not paid the said amount and only volunteered to pay partial amount, however, he submits that in case the court accords time then the same should be as a matter of last indulgence.

7. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record.

8. Apparently, post conviction of the applicant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act an appeal came to be preferred in which an order came to be passed whereby on 14.5.2025 in the appeal, whereby the applicant was to deposit 25% of the total amount of the fine being Rs.14,00,000/- within 30 days, thereafter an application came to be preferred on 23/24.7.2025, for extension of the said time for making the payment which came to be decided by on

25.8.2025 by the court below, requiring the applicant to make the entire payment by 18.9.2025 disallowing the request of the applicant to make the 3 NA528 No. 34815 of 2025 partial payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- by 18.9.2025.

9. Looking into the overall fact situation as well as the documents appended along with the application, showing the fact that the wife of the opposite party no.2 is ailing and also the bona fides sought to be extended by the applicant and the applicant was agreeable to pay of Rs.1,00,000/- by 18.9. 2025, the order dated 25.8.2025 needs modification.

10. The application is being decided in the following terms :-(a) the order dated 25.8.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.15, Prayagraj in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025 is modified to the extent that the applicant shall pay Rs.1,00,000/- by 18.9.2025 and the rest amount of Rs.250,000/- by 15.10.2025; (b) the proof of deposit shall be furnished by

18.9.2025 of the deposit amount Rs.1,00,000/- and by 15.10.2025 of the amount of Rs. 250,000/-; (c) in case the applicant does not pay the said amount by the date fixed by this court, then the order dated 25.8.2025 shall come into effect and the applicant shall be divested from the said protection; (d), the applicant shall furnish a certified copy of the order along with a self- attested copy of the application before the court below by or on 18.9.2025.

11. In order to ensure that there is a compliance of the order of this court, the Registrar Compliance of High Court shall communicate the order to the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Prayagraj. A report regarding the compliance made by the applicant with regard to the deposit of the said amount shall be submitted to the Registrar Compliance by

17.10.2025.

12. It is further clarified that no further application seeking extension of time shall be permitted.

13. The application stands disposed of. September 11, 2025 piyush (Vikas Budhwar,J.) PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Sri Qazi Vakil Ahmad learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pankaj Kumar Rai learned State Law Officer for the State.

2. This is an application filed under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. for quashing the impugned order dated 25.08.2025 passed by the learned Court of Additional District & Session Judge, Room No.15 Prayagraj in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025 (Khursheed Alam @ Khursheed Alam Vs. State of U.P. & another).

3. The case of the applicant is that post lodging of a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act on 2.5.2025, the Court of Presiding Officer, Additional Court, N.I. Act, Court No.2, Prayagraj proceeded to convict the applicant in Complaint Case No. 4826 of 2016, while sentencing him for imprisonment of 9 months and payment of the fine Rs. 14,00,000/- and in case of non- payment of the same, further imprisonment of 3 months. Questioning the same, the applicant preferred Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025, Khursheed Alam @ Dr. Khursheed Alam v. State of U.P., in which on 14.5.2025, the applicant was accorded bail and the conviction, sentence, and the recovery was stayed subject to deposit of 25% of the total amount of the fine determined by the court below within 30 days. An application came to be preferred by the applicant on 23/24.7.2025, seeking a month's further time to make the deposit of the 25%. The said application came to be decided on

25.8.2025 by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Prayagraj, in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025, according 15 days' time to the applicant till 18.9.2025, to make the payment, otherwise on the failure of the 2 NA528 No. 34815 of 2025 same, the bail shall remain cancelled and the sentence shall come into operation.

4. Questioning the said order, the present application has been filed.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that though the order, dated 25.8.2025 has challenged but the applicant is agreeable to deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- by 18.9.2025 and the best amount of Rs.2,50,000/- by 15.10.2025. He has further submitted that the wife of the applicant is ailing and she is not in a position to move and as her mobility has been paralysed and she needs urgent operation and the entire amount which the applicant could save is being spent towards the medical expenditure of the wife in that regard. He as per the specific instructions received from his client, submits that by 18.9.2025, the applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs.1,00,000/ and by 15.10.2025, the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- would be deposited, making the satisfaction to the tune of 25% of the total amount of Rs.14,00,000/- being Rs.3,50,000/-. Learned counsel for the applicant has himself submitted as per the further instructions from the client that the said dates which have been committed by the applicant shall be honoured.

6. Learned State Law Officer on the other hand submits that the sword of conviction is hanging on the neck of the applicant and it is the applicant whose appeal is pending and the applicant himself has preferred an application for seeking time but he has not paid the said amount and only volunteered to pay partial amount, however, he submits that in case the court accords time then the same should be as a matter of last indulgence.

7. I have heard the submissions so made across the bar and perused the record.

8. Apparently, post conviction of the applicant under Section 138 of the N.I. Act an appeal came to be preferred in which an order came to be passed whereby on 14.5.2025 in the appeal, whereby the applicant was to deposit 25% of the total amount of the fine being Rs.14,00,000/- within 30 days, thereafter an application came to be preferred on 23/24.7.2025, for extension of the said time for making the payment which came to be decided by on

25.8.2025 by the court below, requiring the applicant to make the entire payment by 18.9.2025 disallowing the request of the applicant to make the 3 NA528 No. 34815 of 2025 partial payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- by 18.9.2025.

9. Looking into the overall fact situation as well as the documents appended along with the application, showing the fact that the wife of the opposite party no.2 is ailing and also the bona fides sought to be extended by the applicant and the applicant was agreeable to pay of Rs.1,00,000/- by 18.9. 2025, the order dated 25.8.2025 needs modification.

10. The application is being decided in the following terms :-(a) the order dated 25.8.2025 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.15, Prayagraj in Criminal Appeal No. 53 of 2025 is modified to the extent that the applicant shall pay Rs.1,00,000/- by 18.9.2025 and the rest amount of Rs.250,000/- by 15.10.2025; (b) the proof of deposit shall be furnished by

18.9.2025 of the deposit amount Rs.1,00,000/- and by 15.10.2025 of the amount of Rs. 250,000/-; (c) in case the applicant does not pay the said amount by the date fixed by this court, then the order dated 25.8.2025 shall come into effect and the applicant shall be divested from the said protection; (d), the applicant shall furnish a certified copy of the order along with a self- attested copy of the application before the court below by or on 18.9.2025.

11. In order to ensure that there is a compliance of the order of this court, the Registrar Compliance of High Court shall communicate the order to the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 15, Prayagraj. A report regarding the compliance made by the applicant with regard to the deposit of the said amount shall be submitted to the Registrar Compliance by

17.10.2025.

12. It is further clarified that no further application seeking extension of time shall be permitted.

13. The application stands disposed of. September 11, 2025 piyush (Vikas Budhwar,J.) PIYUSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad