Gujarat High Court
Manharbhai Savabhai Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 8 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/7883/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
7883 of 2025
==========================================================
MANHARBHAI SAVABHAI RATHOD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MOHD. SHAHRUKH M SAIYAD (11014) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 08/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
Learned advocate Mr. Ammar Saiyed states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant, and thereby, seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama, which is granted.
[1] Rule. Learned advocates waives service of rule for the respective respondents.
[2] By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, the petitioner has sought quashing of the judgment and order dated 27.02.2025, passed by the learned 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand, in Criminal Case No.9186 of 2023, by which the petitioner has been convicted and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay the amount of Rs.1,32,617/- towards compensation to the complainant and in default of payment of the said amount, the petitioner to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of six months and as the petitioner was not present when the judgment was pronounced, the learned Magistrate Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 09 22:07:01 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/7883/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined issued Non-bailable warrant under Section 70 of the Cr.P.C. against the petitioner.
[3] 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 complainant, which has been confirmed by the complainant by detailed affidavit, which is produced on record separately, the same is taken on record. The complainant do 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.
[4] The petitioner also submits that the petitioner is willing to deposit costs as directed by the Supreme Court in case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H., reported in (2010) 5 SCC 633, with the Legal Service Authority. The complainant is present through virtual mode and affirms the factum of settlement as well as filing of affidavit by him which is produced at Annexure - B. [5] 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.
[6] Thus, taking into account the fact of settlement, the compounding of the offence is hereby permitted.
[7] As a result, the petition is allowed. The judgment and order dated 27.02.2025, passed by the learned 4 th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Anand, in Criminal Case No.9186 of 2023, and warrant issued by it are Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 09 22:07:01 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/7883/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/07/2025 undefined 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 15% of the cheque amount with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within a period of one week from the date of receipt of this order. Rule is made absolute to aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) Ajay / AYJ Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Wed Jul 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 09 22:07:01 IST 2025