- (1.) Heard Sri Pawan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
(2.) This application u/s 482 CrPC has been filed challenging the order dated 1.8.2015 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mathura in Criminal Appeal no. 47 of 2015 (Banshi Ram vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Complaint no. 140 of 2011 (Vikram Singh vs. Banshi Ram), under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, P.S. Kotwali, Mathura, by which non-bailable warrants have been issued. The applicant is an accused in Complaint Case no. 140 of 2011 (Vikram Singh vs. Banshi Ram), P.S. Kotwali, Mathura, who stood convicted under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, on 5.6.2015 and sentenced to 1 year imprisonment with fine of Rs.9,10,000/-, out of which Rs.9 lacs was to be paid as compensation to O.P. No.2 and a default sentence of 3 months. The applicant challenged his conviction and sentence in Criminal Appeal no. 47 of 2015 before the Sessions Judge, Mathura. The Appellate Court while admitting the appeal on 19.6.2015, stayed the realization of half fine, subject to the deposit of remaining half within three days, and the applicant was released on bail on personal bond of Rs.20,000/- and two sureties. While issuing notice to O.P. No.2, on 22.6.2015, an application was filed filed by the applicant before the Appellate Court that as he is in 'Coma', he is only in a position to deposit Rs.20,000/- before the Magistrate and he be granted two months further time to deposit the balance half fine. The Appellate Court on 22.6.2015 ordered that the application is meritless and the order be complied. Subsequently, from 24.6.2015 to 23.7.2015, the matter was adjourned on one pretext or the other. On 23.7.2015, an application for exemption was filed by the applicant alleging that he is in Coma in Una (Himanchal Pradesh). The exemption application was contested by the complainant/ O.P. No.2 on the ground that the order of the Incharge Sessions Judge dated 19.6.2015 has not been complied with, he be not exempted and he was directed to surrender by 1.8.2015, failing which N.B.W, be issued. Simultaneously notices were also directed to be issued to the sureties for production of the applicant on the date fixed or to show cause why the surety amount be not forfeited. On 1.8.2015 again an application for exemption was filed by the applicant, but the same was disallowed on the ground that the order of the appellate court dated 19.6.2015 has not been complied with. It appears that sureties were not served and fresh notices were issued to them and N.B.W also issued against the applicant for 1.9.2015.
(3.) On the previous date, i.e. on 18.8.2015, this Court had adjourned the matter to 3.9.2015, to enable the applicant to tender an ad hoc deposit of Rs.2.25 lac before the Sessions Judge, Mathura. A supplementary affidavit dated 2.9.2015 is filed today indicating a tender/ deposit of Rs.2.25 lacs, which is also authenticated by the order of the Court dated 1.9.2015 passed on the application. Thus in terms of the order of the appellate court dated 19.6.2015, by which he was directed to deposit half fine, i.e. of Rs.4.55 lacs, a sum of Rs.2.25 lacs stands deposited before the Appellate Court on 1.9.2015 leaving an outstanding of Rs.2.25 lacs. Learned counsel for the applicant on the strength of the medical documents contended that considering the serious illness of the applicant, he be granted 4-6 months further time to comply the order dated 19.6.2015 and till then he be granted exemption.;