Order 10

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 17 CA 213/2024
RAMESH CHAND Vs. SANDEEP AGGARWAL
PS (G.T.B. Enclave)
05.05.2026
Present: Appellant in person through VC.
Mr. Mahendra Kumar, Mr. Deepak Sharma, Ms. Rachna Sharma and
Mr. Himani Tomar, Ld. Counsel for the respondent.
The Ld. Counsel for the respondent submits that vide order dt. 20.09.2024,
the appellant was directed to deposit 20 percent of the compensation amount i.e. Rs. 12
lakhs. On his failure to deposit the said amount, the stay on the execution of the
sentence was vacated vide order dt. 05.03.2025. Thereafter, on 08.04.2025 the appellant
was taken into custody. However, vide order dt. 07.08.2025, the Ld. Predecessor had
observed that the appellant should be released from custody as he has completed the
period of imprisonment of 03 months in default of payment of compensation.
Ld. Counsel for the respondent has pointed out that the substantive
sentence for imprisonment imposed vide judgment dt. 31.08.2024 was one year. The
condition for deposit of 20 percent of the amount was for the purpose of suspension of
the sentence as a whole and not merely for suspension of sentence of imprisonment
imposed in default of payment of compensation.
This Court finds that by violating the condition imposed vide order dt,
20.09.2024, there is no effective suspension of sentence imposed vide order dt.
31.08.2024 by the Ld. Trial Court. Hence, the appellant ought to serve the substantive
sentence imposed by the Ld. Trial Court during the pendency of the appeal. Therefore
NBWs be issued against the accused along with notice to his surety for the NDOH.
Be put up for arguments on 11.08.2026.
(Dr. Sumedh Kumar Sethi)
ASJ-05/SHD/KKD Courts
Delhi/05.05.2026
-- 1 of 1 --