ORDER Leave granted. 2. When a person was convicted under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to imprisonment and fine he moved the superior court for suspension of the sentence. The High Court while entertaining his revision granted suspension of the sentence by imposing a condition that part of the fine shall be remitted in court within a specified time. It is against the said direction that this petition has been filed. In our view the High Court has done it correctly and in the interest of justice. We feel that while suspending the sentence for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act it is advisable that the Court imposes a condition that the fine part is remitted within a certain period. If the fine amount is heavy, the Court can direct atleast a portion thereof to be remitted as the convicted person wants the sentence to be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. In this case the grievance of the appellant is that he is required by the High Court to remit a huge amount of rupees four lacs as a condition to suspend the sentence. When considering the total amount of fine imposed by the trial court (twenty lacs of rupees) there is nothing unjust or unconscionable in imposing such a condition. Hence, there is no need to interfere with the impugned order. As such no notice need be issued to the respondent. Appeal is accordingly dismissed. (C.R.) Appeal dismissed. **************** Parallel Citations of other Journals : Stanny Felix Pinto v. M/s. Jangid Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Anr., 2001(1) Supreme 194 : 2001 (1) JT 620 : 2001 (1) All. Crl. L.R. 5 : 2001 (1) Crimes 190 : 2001 Crl. L.J. 1039 : 2001 (1) Comp. L.J. 405 : (2001) 2 SCC 416 : AIR 2001 SC 659 : 2001 Bankmann 181 : 2001 (1) B.C. 712 : 2001 ISJ (Banking) 494 : 2001 (2) B.C. 57 : 2001 (2) UJ (SC) 809 : 2001 Bank J. 523 : 2001 (1) Civil L.J. 506 00024