Gujarat High Court
Mohammed Naeim Mohammed Hussain Shaikh vs State Of Gujarat on 7 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/13227/2024 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 13227 of
2024
==========================================================
MOHAMMED NAEIM MOHAMMED HUSSAIN SHAIKH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RAMNANDAN SINGH(1126) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PREMAL S RACHH(3297) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 07/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule. Learned APP Ms. Shruti Pathak as well as learned advocate Mr. Premal S. Rachh waive service for respondent No.1 - State and respondent No.2 - original complainant, respectively.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the respondent No.2 herein has instituted one complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner herein. Thereafter, the trial commenced and ultimately at the end of the day, vide judgment and order dated 03.12.2018, learned Trial Court convicted the petitioner for the said offence. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order of conviction, the petitioner herein preferred an appeal before the Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:38:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/13227/2024 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025 undefined learned Appellate Court. However, as there was delay in preferring the appeal, separate application for condonation of delay also came to be preferred by the petitioner. However, the said application is dismissed by the learned Appellate Court. Therefore, present petition is preferred.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Ramnandan Singh further submits that on account of dismissal of application seeking condonation of delay, valuable right of the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the order of conviction is jeopardized. He further submits that petitioner is a senior citizen and behind the bars since last more than 10 months. However, without going into further merits of the matter, he has fairly contended that to show his bona fide, petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 20% of the cheque amount as well as the amount of cost that may be imposed by this Court before the learned Trial Court.
4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, learned advocate Mr. Premal Rachh for the respondent No.2 - original complainant submits that if the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 20% of the cheque amount and the amount of cost that may be imposed by this Hon'ble Court to be paid to the complainant, in that event, he has no objection for quashing and setting aside the impugned order.
Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:38:26 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/13227/2024 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025 undefined
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions canvassed by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, without going into the merits of the matter, the petition is partly allowed. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 21.09.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.966 of 2024 is hereby quashed and set aside and delay in preferring the appeal is condoned subject to deposit of 20% of the cheque amount as well as cost of Rs.20,000/- by the petitioner before the learned Trial Court within a period of 2 weeks. The said amount to be paid to the respondent No.2 - original complainant after due verification. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) LAVKUMAR J JANI Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:38:26 IST 2025