JUDGMENT 1. This misc. petition is directed against the order dated 15.4.2008 passed by District and Sessions Court, Rajsamand by which while suspending the sentence awarded by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajsamand to undergo for one year and also to fine Rs.1.50 lacs ordered to pay Rs.1 lac and if, the accused-petitioner deposits Rs.1 lac, the sentence awarded will be in suspension. 2. Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner who issued a cheque of Rs.1.31 lac in favour of the respondent was dishonoured and the complaint filed by the respondent under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act resulted in the said conviction and sentence as aforesaid. 3. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner pleaded that the condition imposed by the Appellate Court is excessive and exorbitant and the present accused-petitioner is not in a position to deposit the said amount of fine of Rs.1 lac. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further pleaded that since the amount of fine of Rs.1 lac has ordered to be remitted by the Appellate Court, a condition for suspension of sentence is too excessive and a portion thereof may be remitted so as to allow the petitioner to deposit the same for suspension of sentence, on merits, his appeal stands on well founded ground. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner cited judgment of the Jaipur Bench of the Hon'ble High Court Ramesh Goyal v. Smt. Reena Goyal & Anr. reported in 2005 RJN 2206 (CD) (Raj.) . 7. For suspension of sentence under Section 389, Cr.P.C. it is the discretion of the Appellate Court to impose any condition while suspending the sentence during pending appeal and it can be ordered that by fulfilling the condition by the accused the sentence passed against will be in suspension. But the condition imposed should not be excessive or exorbitant so as not to allow to fulfill the same. Here initially the allegation against the accused-petitioner is that he issued a cheque of Rs.1.31 lac which was dishonoured, the Court should not be party to remission of amount of issued cheque. The fine of Rs.1 lac to be deposited for suspension of sentence is certainly heavy and excessive which requires curtailment of the amount. Here initially the allegation against the accused-petitioner is that he issued a cheque of Rs.1.31 lac which was dishonoured, the Court should not be party to remission of amount of issued cheque. The fine of Rs.1 lac to be deposited for suspension of sentence is certainly heavy and excessive which requires curtailment of the amount. Keeping in view the law propounded in the cited case, the ends of justice would be met if the petitioner is directed to remit a portion thereof. 8. Looking to the overall situation, it would be just and proper that the petitioner should be directed to deposit sum of Rs.50,000/ - of the fine imposed. 9. Consequently, it is ordered that instead of Rs. 1 lac the petitioner is directed to remit or deposit Rs.50,000/- within a period of one month from today, as the petitioner wants to suspend his sentence awarded during the pendency of the appeal. The order dated 15.4.2008 passed by District and Sessions Court. Rajsamand is modified to that extent. 10. With these observations, the misc. petition stands disposed of.Petition allowed. *******