Gujarat High Court
Prakashkumar Nathubhai Chaudhari vs State Of Gujarat on 15 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/6340/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 6340 of 2025
==========================================================
PRAKASHKUMAR NATHUBHAI CHAUDHARI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR TUSHAR CHAUDHARY(5316) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PM DAVE(263) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. TRUPESH KATHIRIYA, LD.ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 15/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Kathiriya, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1-State of Gujarat. Learned advocate Mr. S.M. Sindhi for learned advocate Mr. P.M. Dave waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.2-original complainant.
2. By this application under section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this court, praying for quashing of the order passed by the learned 4th Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahesana in Criminal Case No.8487 of 2017 on the ground that there has been an amicable settlement between the parties and the respondent No.2-original complainant is no longer desirous of prosecuting further with the matter. The Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Thu Apr 17 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 17 22:19:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/6340/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined authorized officer of the respondent No.2-Bank Shri Himanshu Kadia is personally present and he confirms about the settlement arrived at with the accused person, who is identified by his learned advocate Mr. Sindhi. The respondent No.2- through its authorized officer Shri Himanshu Kadia has also filed an affidavit, inter alia, stating as under:
"I, Himanshu Kadia Aged about 39 Years. Male, Authorized officer person of HDFC Bank having office at HDFC Bank Ltd., 4th Floor, "C" Wing, Sheetal Westpark Imperia, Nr. One Mall & Vastrapur Lake. Vastrapur. Ahmedabad-380052, do hereby solemnly affirm on oath as under-
1. I am authorized officer of the respondent no.2, HDFC Bank Ltd- org. complainant the memo of petition and I am fully conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case and I am duly competent to file this affidavit.
2. I further state and submits that present Applicant herein-Ori accused has approached to the Bank for "Secured Cattle Finance and made an application for the said loan and executed necessary agreement with other documents in favour of the respondent no 2- HDFC-Bank and availed the cash credit loan facility to the extent of Rs.1,33,995 and thereby agreed to repay the entire loan dues as per the terms and conditions of the loan account no 3798741.
3. I further state and submits that the applicant had given cheque bearing no 000006 of Rs 24,980-HDFC bank which was dishonored on 15.11.2017 with reason "Insufficient funds". Subsequently, the respondent no 2 bank through its advocate issued demand notice dtd 22.11.2017 for dishonor of cheque same was served on 25 11 2017. It is further states and submits that on 23. 12.2017 the respondent no.2-Ori complainant-bank has filed a complaint Under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act against the present Applicant-Ori accused for dishonor of Cheque before the learned Chief Judicial Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Thu Apr 17 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 17 22:19:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/6340/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined Magistrate, .Mehsana being criminal case no 8487 of 2017.
4. It is further submitted that the learned trial Court. Mahesana vide the impugned judgment and order dated 06.09.2023 convicted the present Applicant-Ori accused and whereby the Applicant has been convicted and sentenced to was convicted tor 2 years S.I. and also ordered to pay compensation to the respondent no 2-Ori. complainant to the extent of Rs.49,960/- and since, the applicant-ori accused is not present on the day of pronouncement of judgment and order of sentence and considering the fact that the compensation amount has not been deposited The appellant-ori accused is further ordered to undergo simple imprisonment of 2 (two) months for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.
5. I further say and submits that thereafter, Applicant- ori accused had settled the matter with the respondent no 2-HDFC Bank and the settled amount, i.e, Rs.23,740/- is already paid on 05.03.2025 to the respondent no.2- HDFC Bank and loan account of the applicant-accused is closed.
6. I say and submits that I have gone through the memo of Criminal Misc application and the facts and grounds stated in the memo of petition are not disputed by me, because Applicant had already settled the matter by depositing settled amount and now account of Applicant is closed and therefore, the disputes and grievances of both the sides have been amicably settled. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, if the judgment and order of conviction passed by Ld 4 th Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate. Mahesana in Criminal Case no.8487 of 2017 dtd 06.09.2023 against the Applicant- Ori accused may be quashed and set aside in accordance with law.
VERIFICATION 1 Himanshu Kadia authorised officer/person of Respondent no 2 herein-ori complainant-bank, having Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Thu Apr 17 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 17 22:19:26 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/6340/2025 ORDER DATED: 15/04/2025 undefined branch office at HDFC Bank Ltd, 4 th Floor, "C" Wing, Sheetal Westpark Imperia, Nr. One Mall & Vastrapur Lake, Vastrapur Ahmedabad-380052, do hereby solemnly affirm: verify and state on oath that What is stated para 1 to 6 are true to the best of my personal knowledge, information and belief and I believe the same to be true and correct.
Solemnly affirmed at Ahmedabad on this 9 th day of April, 2025."
3. Taking into consideration the nature of the dispute and the fact that the parties have now amicably decided to live peacefully, no useful purpose would be served to allow the police to continue with the investigation of the said first information report.
4. In the result, this application is allowed. The order passed by the learned 4th Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahesana in Criminal Case No.8487 of 2017 is hereby ordered to be quashed. All consequential proceedings arising from the same also stands terminated. Rule is made absolute.
Direct service is permitted.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) VAHID Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by ABDULVAHID A SHAIKH(HC00955) on Thu Apr 17 2025 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 17 22:19:26 IST 2025