ORDER : 1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘the Cr.P.C.’) seeking to set aside an order passed by Court of Sessions, Thrissur (for short ‘the appellate court’) on 26.07.2022 in Crl.M.P.No.2259/2022. Crl.M.P.No.2259/2022 was filed by the petitioner in Criminal Appeal No.153/2022 originated from the judgment passed by Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chavakkad in CC No.1144/2016 (for short ‘the trial court’). 2. The petitioner herein faced trial before the trial court and the trial court found him guilty and convicted and sentenced him. Against the judgment passed as above the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.153/2022 alongwith Crl.M.P.No.2259/2022 seeking for suspension of execution of sentence. In exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the N.I.Act’), the appellate court allowed the application and directed the petitioner herein to deposit 20% of the fine amount imposed by the trial court. 3. It is contended by Sri.Adithya Rajeev, the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has got a valid point to be raised in the Criminal Appeal and if that is considered, the petitioner ought to have been exempted from paying 20% of the fine amount. The appellate court was not convinced of the argument and accordingly directed the petitioner to pay 20% of the fine amount. 4. It is found from the impugned order that the petitioner through his counsel had argued the point now raised before the appellate court and it has been observed that consideration of that point would tantamount to consideration of the appeal itself. Accordingly the appellate court rejected the prayer of the petitioner to waive the condition to impose 20% of the fine amount. 5. This Court has no different view. If a court is directed to consider the grounds raised in the appeal itself while exercising jurisdiction under Section 148 N.I.Act, it would consume much time and that was also not envisaged by the provision. 6. This Court is not inclined to accept the argument advanced. However, it is noticed from the impugned order that time limit for deposit of 20% of the fine amount is not fixed. 6. This Court is not inclined to accept the argument advanced. However, it is noticed from the impugned order that time limit for deposit of 20% of the fine amount is not fixed. Under Section 148 N.I.Act, the petitioner would be entitled to get 60 days’ time for deposit of the fine amount primarily and on completion of the 60 days, would be granted with 30 days more, on sufficient cause being shown. Since the impugned order did not specify the time within which 20% of the fine amount shall be deposited before the court, this Court is inclined to grant 90 days’ time from 26.07.2022 to the petitioner for depositing the fine amount. The appellate court shall also expedite the disposal of Criminal Appeal No.153/2022.