2025 INSC 1459
1
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2025
(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.12327 OF 2025)
BHARAT MITTAL …APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
ARAVIND KUMAR, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The important question that arises before this Court in the present case is:
“When a director of an accused company is convicted under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NI Act’),
without the company itself being convicted due to some existing ‘legal snag’
- such as winding up, liquidation, or any similar scenario -can the appellate
court, while hearing the appeal filed by the director challenging his
conviction and sentence, impose a condition of depositing 20% of the
amount as prescribed under Section 148 of the Act?” This question assumes
significance in the present context, given the large number of litigations
arising under Section 138 of the NI Act. To properly address the complexity
2
of this issue and appreciate the existing legal position that guides us in
determining the mandate in such cases, it is necessary to first examine the
facts of the present case, which falls within this category.
BRIEF FACTS:
3. The Respondent No. 2/ S...