Gujarat High Court
Rajput Vijaysinh Natwarsinh ... vs State Of Gujarat on 29 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/4069/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 4069 of 2025
==========================================================
RAJPUT VIJAYSINH NATWARSINH PROPRIETOR OF JAY GOPAL
TRADING COMPANY
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS ALPA J DAVE(3924) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 29/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent - State of Gujarat.
[1.0] By way of present batch of petitions, the petitioner has assailed the order/s passed below purshis filed by the present petitioner - accused in pending Criminal Appeal by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana at Visnagar.
[2.0] The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unjha convicted the present petitioner - accused in Criminal Case filed under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short "NI Act") and has been pleased to convict the present petitioner - accused and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and also directed the petitioner - accused to make payment of cheque amount with 9% interest till date of payment towards compensation failing which further simple imprisonment of six months has been Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 01:15:10 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4069/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined imposed.
[2.1] Being aggrieved with the said conviction, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal before the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Visnagar alongwith application under Section 389(1) of the CrPC for suspension of order of conviction and sentence and the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Visnagar has been pleased to suspend the judgment and order of conviction and sentence by imposing condition upon the petitioner to deposit 20% of the cheque amount within a period of 30 days. The said cheque amount came to be deposited by the petitioner with the learned appellate Court.
[2.2] After deposit of 20% of the cheque amount by the petitioner
- accused, the original complainant - respondent No.2 herein filed a purshis seeking permission to withdraw the said 20% of the cheque amount deposited by the petitioner - accused in respective criminal appeals, which purshis / request has been accepted by the learned 4 th Additional Sessions Judge subject to condition that if the petitioner - accused succeeds in criminal appeals then the respondent No.2 herein - original complainant shall have to repay the said 20% amount alongwith existing FD rate of interest.
[2.3] By way of present batch of petitions, the petitioner - accused has challenged the said order.
[3.0] Perusing the grievance of the petitioner and the nature of order under challenge, prima facie, it appears that under Section 143(a) of the NI Act, impugned order is passed and even Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 01:15:10 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4069/2025 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined otherwise, under Section 148(3) of the NI Act, which reads as under, appellate Court has power to pass such order:
"148(3). The Appellate Court may direct the release of the amount deposited by the appellant to the complainant at any time during the pendency of the appeal:
Provided that if the appellant is acquitted, the Court shall direct the complainant to repay to the appellant the amount so released, with interest at the bank rate as published by the Reserve Bank of India, prevalent at the beginning of the relevant financial year, within sixty days from the date of the order, or within such further period not exceeding thirty days as may be directed by the Court on sufficient cause being shown by the complainant.]"
Hence, prima facie, this Court is of the considered view that there is no any perversity and illegality in the impugned order and no cause exists to interfere with the same in exercise of powers under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India.
[4.0] In view of the above, no case is made out to entertain the present petition as this Court is of the considered view that present litigation has been filed only with a view to protract the proceeding of criminal appeal. Hence, present petition is dismissed in limine. Rule is hereby discharged in each of the petitions.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Tue Jul 29 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 01:15:10 IST 2025