The Telangana High Court has clarified that courts may exercise discretion to reduce mandatory compensation deposits imposed as conditions for suspension of sentence under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, particularly when the accused is a senior citizen with demonstrable financial hardship. This ruling reinforces judicial flexibility in enforcing procedural conditions without undermining the punitive intent of the statute.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioner, Kotla Venkata Rama Kumar, was convicted under Section 304 Part II IPC in Criminal Case No. 3055 of 2018 by the Family Court-cum-IV Additional Sessions Judge, Khammam, and sentenced to imprisonment and payment of compensation. The conviction was upheld on appeal, but the sentence was suspended subject to conditions.
Key Facts
- The petitioner was convicted on 17.11.2025 in C.C. No. 3055 of 2018
- The trial court imposed a compensation amount of Rs. 6,00,000/-
- On 16.12.2025, the learned Judge suspended the sentence in Crl.A. No. 101 of 2025 on condition that the petitioner deposit 20% of the compensation, i.e., Rs. 1,20,000/-, on or before 16.01.2026
- The petitioner, a senior citizen, failed to deposit the amount by the deadline
- The petitioner filed a Criminal Petition under Sections 485(1)(b) and 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking relaxation of the deposit condition
- The petitioner submitted that he is financially incapable of paying Rs. 1,20,000/- and requested reduction to 10% (Rs. 60,000/-)
Procedural History
- 17.11.2025: Conviction and sentencing in C.C. No. 3055 of 2018
- 16.12.2025: Order passed in Crl.M.P. No. 01 of 2025 (filed in Crl.A. No. 101 of 2025) suspending sentence subject to deposit of Rs. 1,20,000/-
- 16.01.2026: Deadline for deposit expired without compliance
- 17.03.2026: Criminal Petition No. 3778 of 2026 filed before the Telangana High Court
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought modification of the deposit condition from 20% (Rs. 1,20,000/-) to 10% (Rs. 60,000/-) of the compensation amount, citing his age and inability to pay.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether a court, under Section 485(1)(b) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has the discretion to reduce the percentage of compensation deposit mandated as a condition for suspension of sentence, particularly when the accused is a senior citizen facing genuine financial hardship.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bodla, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the condition of depositing 20% of the compensation amount was unduly burdensome for the petitioner, who is a senior citizen with limited means. He relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Jamboo Bhandari v. M.P. State of Industrial Development Corporation Limited (2023) 10 SCC 446, which emphasized judicial discretion and humanitarian considerations in imposing conditions for suspension of sentence. He argued that the condition should be proportionate and not punitive in nature, especially when the accused is not a flight risk or a threat to society.
For the Respondent
The State did not oppose the prayer for reduction. The Public Prosecutor acknowledged the petitioner’s age and financial condition and did not contest the request to reduce the deposit to 10%.
The Court's Analysis
The Court examined the nature of the condition imposed under Section 485(1)(b) of the BNSS, which permits suspension of sentence subject to such conditions as the court deems fit, including deposit of compensation. The Court noted that while the condition serves the purpose of ensuring accountability and partial restitution to the victim, it must not become an instrument of undue hardship.
"The condition of depositing compensation is not an end in itself but a means to ensure partial restitution and deterrence. When the accused is a senior citizen with no means to meet an arbitrary financial burden, the court must exercise its discretion to ensure justice is not denied on account of inability to pay."
The Court referred to Jamboo Bhandari, where the Supreme Court held that conditions for suspension of sentence must be reasonable, proportionate, and not oppressive. The Court observed that the petitioner had not contested the conviction, had cooperated with proceedings, and was not a repeat offender. The imposition of Rs. 1,20,000/- as a precondition for liberty was disproportionate to the petitioner’s circumstances.
The Court further held that reducing the deposit to 10% would still serve the statutory purpose of partial restitution while respecting the petitioner’s dignity and financial reality.
The Verdict
The petitioner succeeded. The Telangana High Court modified the condition imposed by the trial court and directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the compensation amount, i.e., Rs. 60,000/-, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. All other conditions imposed by the trial court remain unchanged. The Criminal Petition is disposed of accordingly.
What This Means For Similar Cases
Compensation Deposits Must Be Proportionate
- Practitioners must now argue that conditions under Section 485(1)(b) BNSS must be assessed for proportionality, not applied mechanically
- A fixed percentage (e.g., 20%) should not be treated as mandatory; courts must consider age, health, income, and financial capacity
- Reduction to 10% or lower is now a viable legal argument for senior citizens or economically vulnerable accused
Judicial Discretion Trumps Rigid Compliance
- The judgment affirms that suspension of sentence is an equitable remedy, not a punitive condition
- Courts must balance victim restitution with the accused’s fundamental right to liberty under Article 21
- Failure to deposit should not automatically result in dismissal of appeal if the accused demonstrates good faith and inability
Precedent from Jamboo Bhandari Is Now Binding in BNSS Matters
- The Jamboo Bhandari principle - that conditions must not be oppressive - is now directly applicable to suspension of sentence under BNSS
- This opens the door for similar applications in cases involving fines, compensation, or surety conditions under Sections 485 and 528 BNSS
- Advocates should cite Jamboo Bhandari in all pending applications seeking relaxation of financial conditions for suspension of sentence
