Tunikipati Ravi, Hyd v. M.V. Narender And Another Rep. By P.P.

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. SHANKAR NARAYANA Criminal Revision Case No.3100 of 2017 JUDGMENT:

Challenging the order dated 20.11.2017, in Criminal M.P. No.249 of 2017 in Criminal Appeal No.1227 of 2017, passed by the VIII-Additional Sessions Judge, R.R. District at L.B. Nagar, whereby and whereunder, while suspending the operation of sentence passed by the XI-Special Magistrate's Court, at Hastinapuram, R.R. District, in C.C.

No.21 of 2017, dated 25.10.2017, directed the petitioner/appellant to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) out of the compensation amount by 8.12.2017 and as one of the conditions besides ordering on the same terms and conditions as imposed by the trial Court.

While inflicting the sentence, the learned Magistrate has awarded compensation of Rs.36,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six lakhs only) under Section 357 (1) of Cr.P.C.

The law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dilip S. Dahanukar v. Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. and Another1 is to the effect that one-fourth of the compensation awarded shall be deposited. Thus, it is not even one-fourth of the compensation awarded. Learned counsel would make a request to extend the time fixed by the learned lower Appellate Court. Acceding to the request, time is extended by four weeks from today, within which the said condition shall be complied with by the revision petitioner. 1 (2007) 6 SCC 528

There is no merit in the present Criminal Revision Case and, is, accordingly dismissed extending the time as indicated in the above. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Criminal Revision Case shall stand closed. ________________________ A. SHANKAR NARAYANA Dt. 05.12.2017 Note:- CC by 6.12.2017.

(B/O) gbs