Indrajit Ambalal Patel vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Indrajit Ambalal Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 28 April, 2025

                                                                                                                     NEUTRAL CITATION




                            R/SCR.A/3856/2025                                       ORDER DATED: 28/04/2025

                                                                                                                     undefined




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                            R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3856 of 2025
                                         (FOR CONSENT QUASHING)

                      =======================================================
                                       INDRAJIT AMBALAL PATEL
                                                Versus
                                      STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
                      =======================================================
                      Appearance:
                      DR HIREN S SOMAIYA(8031) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                      MR ROHAN SHAH APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                      MR MOULESH A VYAS for the Respondent No.2
                      =======================================================

                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI

                                                       Date : 28/04/2025
                                                             ORAL ORDER

1. With the consent of learned advocates appearing for the parties, present application is taken up for final disposal today.

2. Rule. Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties waive service of notice of rule.

3. By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 528 of the Code of Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner has sought quashing of the judgment and order dated 06.10.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Borsad in Criminal Case No.3653/2005, by which the petitioner has been convicted and ordered to Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 10:31:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/3856/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/04/2025 undefined undergo imprisonment as mentioned in the said order and as the petitioner was not present when the judgment was pronounced, learned Judicial Magistrate, Umreth issued Non-bailable warrant under Section 70 of the Cr.P.C. against the petitioner.

4. Heard learned advocate, Mr. Somaiya for the applicant, learned APP Mr. Shah for respondent no.1 and learned advocate, Mr. Vyas for respondent no.2, who is permitted to file his Vakalatnama in the Registry. I have also heard the respondent no.2 - complainant, who is present before this Court. Learned advocate, Mr. Vyas identifies respondent no.2 and confirms correctness and genuineness of the affidavit filed by him.

5. When the matter is called out, learned advocates appearing for the parties have submitted that now the dispute is amicably settled between the parties and, therefore, the respondent no.2 has filed an affidavit before this Court, copy of which is placed on record at Page No.67. Upon making inquiry, the respondent no.2, who is present before this Court, has stated that he has settled the dispute with the present applicant and, therefore, if the impugned judgment and order of conviction is quashed, he has no objection. Learned advocate submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit cost as directed by the Supreme Court in case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 10:31:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/3856/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/04/2025 undefined Sayed Babalal H., reported in (2010) 5 SCC 633, with the Legal Service Authority.

6. In view of the rival submissions canvassed by learned advocates for the parties and having gone through the material available on record, it appears that the settlement has been arrived at between the complainant and present petitioner and the entire cheque amount has been paid to the respondent No.2, which has been confirmed by the complainant by detailed affidavit, which has been on record of the matter. The complainant does not wish to proceed further and is willing to compound the offence. Accordingly, the petitioner by filing this petition, seeks compounding of the offence under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

7. In case of Kripalsingh Pratapsingh Vs. Salvinder Kaur Hardisingh Lohana, reported in (2004) 2 GLH 544, the Coordinate Bench of this Court after considering various decisions of the Apex Court, took a view that it would be permissible for the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code, to record the settlement arrived at between the parties and acquit the accused of the charges.

8. Thus, taking into account the fact of settlement, the compounding of the offence is hereby permitted.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/3856/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/04/2025 undefined

9. As a result, the present petition is allowed. The judgment order passed by the Court below i.e. the judgment and order dated 06.10.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Borsad in Criminal Case No.3653/2005 are hereby quashed and set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the offences under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner is directed to deposit 10% of the cheque amount with the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

10. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Direct service permitted.

(DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.) Gautam Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by PATIL GAUTAMBHAI GOPALBHAI(HC00190) on Mon Apr 28 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 29 10:31:56 IST 2025