Raval Pankajkumar Chinubhai vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Raval Pankajkumar Chinubhai vs State Of Gujarat on 7 May, 2025

                                                                                                                        NEUTRAL CITATION




                             R/CR.MA/9267/2025                                            ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025

                                                                                                                         undefined




                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                          R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
                                               9267 of 2025

                       ==========================================================
                                                  RAVAL PANKAJKUMAR CHINUBHAI
                                                             Versus
                                                    STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR ANVESH V VYAS(5654) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MR MANAN MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       MR SAGAR PANDYA, for the Respondent No. 2
                       ==========================================================

                            CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI

                                                            Date : 07/05/2025

                                                                 ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate Mr. Sagar Pandya submits that he has got instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.2 - original complainant. He is permitted to file his Vakalatnama in the Registry. Registry to accept the same.

2. By way of preferring present application, the petitioner seeks to inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 03.03.2025 passed by learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana in Criminal Case No.7805 of 2023 and terminating all the proceedings arising thereunder qua the petitioner.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9267/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025 undefined

3. Rule. Learned advocates for the respective respondents waive service.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that total cheque amount has been paid to the complainant and the complainant has no grievance now. Respondent No. 2 - original complainant is present through virtual mode and is identified by learned advocate Mr. Sagar Pandya. The learned advocate for the respondent No. 2

- original complainant states that the complainant has received the total cheque amount and the complainant does not want to pursue the matter now in view of amicable settlement and has given consent for compounding the offence. The complainant also filed an affidavit to that effect, which is placed on record.

5. Now, since matter is settled between the parties and due amount is paid to respondent No.2 - complainant and in view of the fact that offence under the N.I Act is now made compoundable, it is to be encouraged. Considering the affidavit, it is clear that the compounding is genuine, and therefore, the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 03.03.2025 passed by learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana in Criminal Case No.7805 of 2023 is hereby quashed and set aside.

6. In view of sub-section (8) of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner is acquitted of the charge leveled against him.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/9267/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/05/2025 undefined

7. Since the compounding between the parties is arrived at this stage before this Court, a cost in required to be imposed on the petitioner in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal reported in AIR 2010 SC 1907. As per the said decision, the petitioner is required to deposit 15% of the cheque amount. However, in view of para 17 of the said judgment, a discretion is granted to the competent Court to reduce the amount of cost or waive the same on specific facts and circumstances of a case.

8. Considering the reasons given by learned advocate for the applicant, instead of imposing 15% of the cheque amount as cost, I deem it fit to impose 10% of the cheque amount as cost. Learned advocate of the petitioner has tendered an undertaking of the petitioner wherein he has shown his willingness to deposit 10% of the cheque amount.

9. Accordingly, the present application is allowed subject to deposit of 10% of the cheque amount with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within a week from today. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.

(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) LAVKUMAR J JANI Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Thu May 08 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 09 03:19:29 IST 2025