JUDGMENT : SURESHWAR THAKUR, J. 1. The instant petition is directed against the orders pronounced, on, 5.9.2017 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1 Solan, H.P. camp at Nalagarh, whereby he, while proceeding to suspend the execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner/convict, ordered him, to deposit a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-, besides directed him to furnish personal and surety bond(s) in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each. Meeting compliance(s) therewith by the petitioner/convict, was, imperative for the orders recorded by the learned appellate Court, whereby, it temporarily suspended the execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment imposed upon him, by the learned trial Magistrate, hence taking absolute binding effect, during, the pendency of the criminal appeal bearing No. 18 of 2017, before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan, H.P. However, the petitioner has not meted compliance therewith, rather he has proceeded to assail the aforesaid directions, pronounced upon him, by his motioning this Court through the instant petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner/convict has drawn the attention of this Court, to a verdict pronounced by Hon’ble Apex Court in 2007(6) SCC 528 , titled as Dalip S. Dahanukar versus Kotak Mahindra Co. Ltd. and another, paragraph 72, whereof is extracted hereinafter: “72 We, therefore, are of the opinion: (i) in a case of this nature, sub-Section (2) of Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would be attracted even when the appellant was directed to pay compensation; (ii) the appellate Court, however, while suspending the sentence, was entitled to put the appellate on terms. However, no such term could be put as condition precedent for entertaining the appeal which is a constitutional and statutory right; (iii) the amount of compensation must be a reasonable sum; (iv) the Court, while fixing such amount, must have regard to all relevant factors including the one referred to in sub-Section (5) of Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; (v) no unreasonable amount of compensation can be directed to be paid.” wherein it is mandated that even though, no condition can be imposed upon the petitioner/convict, by the learned appellate Court, to, compulsorily make deposit of the compensation amount imposed upon him, by the convicting Court nor it being an imperative condition precedent, for, entertaining an appeal, yet, it is also mentioned therein, that fixing of compensation amount must be, in a reasonable sum. 3. 3. A thorough incisive reading of the judgment supra, rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court, pertinently the trite orders assailed before it, orders whereof stand extracted hereinafter: “Accused 1, company, M/s Good value Marketing Co. Ltd. stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Accused 1 company is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only). In default of payment of fine, Accused 2 Mr.Dilip Dahanukar, the Chairman of Accused 1 and representative at the trial, shall suffer SI for 1 month. Accused 2 Mr. Dilip Dahanukar, stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Accused 2 is sentenced to suffer SI for 1 month. Accused 2 is also directed to pay compensation to the complainant, quantified at Rs. 15,00,000 (Rupees fifteen lakhs only), under Section 357 (3) Cr. P.C. Accused 2 is entitled to pay the amount of compensation in two equal monthly installments of Rs. 7,50,000 each. The first installment of Rs. 7,50,000 shall be paid on or before 23.3.2006 and the second installment of Rs. 7,50,000 shall be paid on or before 24.4.2006; in default of payment of the amount of compensation Accused 2 shall suffer further SI for 2 months.” Unveil (i) that the aggrieved accused No. 2 therein, was, sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment extending upto 1 month, for his committing an offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, (ii) AND apart there from, the convicting Court imposed upon him a liability of compensation amount, comprised in a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- ,yet in default thereof, the accused No. 2 therein, was sentenced to undergo further simple imprisonment extending upto a period of 2 months. However, hereat, the convicting Court while pronouncing a direction upon the accused/petitioner herein, to pay a sum of Rs.7,10,000/-, as compensation to the complainant, (iii) did not, upon, the accused/petitioner herein making default(s) in respect thereto, sentence him, to undergo any period of imprisonment. However, hereat, the convicting Court while pronouncing a direction upon the accused/petitioner herein, to pay a sum of Rs.7,10,000/-, as compensation to the complainant, (iii) did not, upon, the accused/petitioner herein making default(s) in respect thereto, sentence him, to undergo any period of imprisonment. Importantly, hence when only application(s) espousing therein, relief of, suspension of execution, of sentence(s) of imprisonment, are, statutorily institute-able before the appellate Courts concerned, (iv) conspicuously, then the important trite factum to be borne in mind by the Appellate Court concerned, where before whom an espousal is reared, for suspending the execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment (a) is of the liability of compensation amount encumbered upon the convict, by the convicting Court; (b) being also accompanied by an order pronouncing that, in default thereof, his undergoing sentence(s) of imprisonment. 4. The statutory powers, foisted, upon the appellate Court, to suspend the execution of sentences) of imprisonment, imposed upon the convict, by the convicting Court, are borne in Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the apt sub-section (3) whereof stands extracted hereinafter: “Where the convicted person satisfied the Court by which he is convicted that he intends to present an appeal, the Court shall- (i) where such person, being on bail, is sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, or (ii) where the offence of which such person has been convicted is a bailable one, and he is on bail, Order that the convicted person be released on bail, unless there are special reasons for refusing bail, for such period as will afford sufficient time to present the appeal and obtain the orders of the Appellate Court under sub-section (1), and the sentence of imprisonment shall, so long as he is so released on bail, be deemed to be suspended. Readings whereof also make up-surging(s) of (i) the statutory powers foisted upon the appellate Court, to suspend the execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment being extendable only vis-a-vis suspending execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment, (ii) thereupon the imposition by the convicting Court, upon, the accused/petitioner herein, an appropriate sentence of imprisonment, upon, his making default(s) in paying the compensation amount assessed, vis-à-vis the complainant, being imperative, (iii) whereas hereat the convicting Court, upon the convict/petitioner/accused herein, not, making deposit(s) of compensation amount encumbered upon him, not imposing sentence(s) of imprisonment upon him, may not befittingly, empower the appellate Court, (iv) to yet insist upon its deposit, as a pre-condition for its ordering, for, suspending the execution of the apposite sentence(s) of imprisonment imposed by the learned convicting Court, (v) conspicuously when reiteratedly, in default of its payment, no sentence of imprisonment stood imposed upon him. 5. Further more, Section 431 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter: “Money ordered to be paid recoverable as a fine- Any money (other than a fine) payable by virtue of any order made under this Code, and the method of recovery of which is not otherwise expressly provided for, shall be recoverable as if it were a fine: Provided that Section 421 shall, in its application to an order under Section 359, by virtue of this section, be construed as if in the proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 421, after the words and figures “under section 357 “the words and figures or an order for payment of costs under section 359” had been inserted.” Renders any compensation amount, to be also recoverable as a fine also despite the convicting Court, not making any order for the apposite compensation amount being construable to be a fine, or on its realization as a fine, a part thereof being remitted as compensation vis-à-vis the complainant. Nonetheless, it was imperative, for, the learned appellate Court to, also discern from the orders, of, conviction rendered upon the accused, by the convicting Court, (ii) qua upon any default(s) by the convict, in his making deposit(s) of compensation amount, his being also sentenced to undergo imprisonment, (ii) before, its making apt insistence(s), upon the convict, to, as a pre-condition for its ordering, for, suspending the execution of sentence of imprisonment, his depositing the compensation amount (iii) whereupon alone rather the apposite insistence made by the learned appellate Court, upon the convict would be hence amenable, for validation. Moreover, on a reading of all the aforesaid inference(s), in coagulation with the provisions borne in Section 421 of the Code, of Criminal Procedure, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter: “421 Warrant for levy of time: (i) When an offender has been sentenced to pay a fine, the Court passing the sentence may take action for the recovery of the fine in either or both of the following ways, that is to say, it may- (a) issue a warrant for the levy of the amount by attachment and sale of any moveable property belonging to the offender; (b) issue a warrant to the Collector of the district, authorizing him to realize the amount as arrears of land revenue from the movable or immovable property, or both, of the defaulter; Provided that, if the sentence directs that in default of payment of fine, the offender shall be imprisoned, and if such offender has undergone the whole of such imprisonment in default, no Court shall issue such warrant unless, for special reasons to be recorded in writing, it considers it necessary to do so, or unless it has made an order for the payment of expenses or compensation out of the fine under section 357. (2) The State Government may make rules regulating the manner in which warrants under clause (a) of sub-Section (1) are to be executed, and for the summary determination of any claims made by any person other than the offender in respect of any property attached in execution of such warrant. (2) The State Government may make rules regulating the manner in which warrants under clause (a) of sub-Section (1) are to be executed, and for the summary determination of any claims made by any person other than the offender in respect of any property attached in execution of such warrant. (3) Where the Court issues a warrant to the Collector under clause (b) of sub-section (1), the Collector shall realize the amount in accordance with the law relating to recovery of arrears of land revenue, as if such warrant were a certificate issued under such law; Provided that no such warrant shall be executed by the arrest or detention in prison of the offender.” Unveilings occur of (i) upon imposition of a simplicitor sentence(s) of fine upon the convict, by the convicting Court, (a) it being executable by issuance of warrant, of attachment and sale of moveable and immoveable property of the offender; b) by the Collector concerned authorizing realization of amount(s) of fine, as, arrear of rent from the moveable or immoveable asset(s), of the offender or (ii) however, proviso thereto underscores; (i) that where in default, of payment of fine, the offender has been sentenced, to undergo some period of imprisonment, thereupon with the offender, in default of his liquidating fine amount(s), undergoing the sentence(s), of imprisonment imposed upon him, in respect whereof, he also stood sentenced by the convicting Court, the Courts concerned, being barred (iii) “unless” for compelling reasons, being recorded in writing(s), to realize them, in the manner prescribed in sub-Section (1) thereto (iv) OR also in the concluding para of Section 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a mandate exists, of the preceding thereto provisions, comprised in sub-Section (1), also holding sway vis-à-vis direction(s) pronounced upon the convict by the convicting Court, qua compensation amount, hence being ordered to be realizable from fine(s) amounts imposed upon him, whereupon the imposition of compensation amount upon him also is rendered realizable, in the aforesaid manner. However, the effect of the aforesaid substantive portion, of, Section 421 of Cr. P.C., is may be overcome by the provisions of Section 431 of the Cr. P.C. , wherein also simplicitor encumbrance(s) of compensation amount, upon the convict, by the Convicting Court, is also ordained to be realizable as a fine. However, the effect of the aforesaid substantive portion, of, Section 421 of Cr. P.C., is may be overcome by the provisions of Section 431 of the Cr. P.C. , wherein also simplicitor encumbrance(s) of compensation amount, upon the convict, by the Convicting Court, is also ordained to be realizable as a fine. Obviously, reiteratedly thereupon, too, the realization, of even simplicitor imposition of compensation amount, also as a fine, from the convict would obviously occur in the manner envisaged in sub-Section (1) of Section 421, of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In aftermath, the statutory mechanism, envisaged therein was employable for realizing the simplicitor imposition, of compensation amount from the convict, than by the learned appellate Court, making insistences for its deposit by the convict, as a pre-condition for suspending the execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment imposed upon the convict, by the learned convicting Court. 6. Consequently, the compensation amount a) being hereat levied, as simplicitor compensation amount by the convicting Court hereat, upon the convict, hence when it was amenable for its realization, in the manner envisaged under Section 421 of the Cr. P.C.; b) also upon the convict making apposite defaults, yet with no sentence of imprisonment being pronounced by the convicting Court, upon him in respect thereto,; c) renders any insistence, for its, deposit by the learned appellate Court, as a pre-condition for its suspending the execution of sentence of imprisonment, to may be not statutorily apt; d) especially when the aforesaid distinctivity interse the factual matrix of the judgment supra rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court, vis-à-vis the judgment recorded by the convicting Court, hereat, would thereupon render, it to be yet inapplicable hereat, especially when i) therein the Hon’ble Apex Court, stood seized, with an order of conviction, in sequel whereto in the apposite sentence, pronounced upon the convict, a mandate occurs, of, upon his making defaults, in liquidating liabilities of compensation amount, of thereupon, sentence(s) of imprisonment standing also imposed upon him, (ii) where after the Hon’ble Apex Court stood constrained to record the view encapsulated in its judgment (supra); ii) whereas, heareat the aforesaid imposition of compensation amount, upon, the accused/convict, by the convicting Court, remaining, upon, his making default(s) thereof, unaccompanied by imposition of sentence(s) of imprisonment, thereupon reiteratedly renders the verdict recorded by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case (supra) to be not with its fullest force applicable hereat. 7. 7. Be that as it may, the Appellate Court, may, for ensuring, in case accused/convict, does, upon his conviction being affirmed by the appellate Court render, by his disposing his moveable and immoveable assets, hence unrealizable, the simplicitor imposition of compensation amount upon him, especially in the manner embodied under Section 421 of the Cr. P.C., (i) therefore, it is deemed fit, that, a fair portion of the compensation amount imposed upon him, being directed to be deposited by him by the learned appellate Court, as a precondition, for the orders suspending the execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment, imposed upon him, by the convicting Court taking binding effect, till the disposal of the criminal appeal, by the learned appellate Court concerned. 8. Consequently, with the Hon’ble Apex Court, in case supra, being seized with a cheque bearing a sum of Rs.15,00,000/-, hence proceeded to asses a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as a compensation amount, to be, deposited before the Court concerned, for the execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment imposed upon the convict taking binding effect, in sequel, with the cheque amount here before, being comprised in a sum of Rs.7,10,000/-, this Court is constrained to hold that a sum of Rs.75,000/- would be a reasonable amount, to be deposited before the appellate Court by the convict/accuse d, for thereupon the suspension of execution of sentence(s) of imprisonment imposed upon him, taking binding effect, till the appellate Court concerned renders an adjudication upon the apposite criminal appeal. 9. Consequently, the petitioner/convict is directed to make deposit of the aforesaid amount within three weeks before the learned appellate Court. The petition is partly allowed and the impugned order to the above extent, is modified. All pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of. Copy of the verdict be forthwith circulated to all the subordinate Courts.