Gujarat High Court
Bharat Shitaldas Lalwani vs State Of Gujarat on 1 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/649/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 649
of 2025
==========================================================
BHARAT SHITALDAS LALWANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KEVAL G BRAHMBHATT (BAROT)(9900) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HK PATEL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 01/05/2025
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.
[2.0] Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicant and original complainant has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith as alleged offence is bailable and compoundable.
[3.0] By way of this application under Section 397 (section 438 of BNSS) read with Section 401 (section 442 of BNSS) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "CrPC"), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 20.04.2022 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anjar-Kachchh in Criminal Case No.1490 of 2018, whereby the Trial Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by KUMAR ALOK(HC01091) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 03:57:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/649/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 undefined Court has been pleased to hold the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to undergo SI of 1 year and also directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- and further he is directed to pay an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- to the original complainant as compensation. The said order was assailed before the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Anjar-Kachchh by way of impugned Judgment and order of sentence dated 27.09.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.17 of 2022. The said appeal came to be dismissed and the order of conviction has been confirmed and upheld by the concerned Additional Sessions Judge. Hence, this Revision Application is filed.
[4.0] Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the issue. It is further submitted that in view of the fact that the dispute is resolved, present application deserves consideration.
[5.0] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the present application and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, present application may be rejected.
[6.0] Learned advocate Mr.Vishwassinh V. Sisodiya for the Original Complainant has received instructions to appear on behalf of the original-complainant. He is permitted to file his appearance before the Registry.
Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by KUMAR ALOK(HC01091) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 03:57:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/649/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 undefined [6.1] Learned advocate for original complainant has reiterated the
contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant. The learned advocate for original complainant also relied upon the affidavit filed by the original complainant - Mr.Bhavesh Babubhai Luhar, who is also personally present in person before the Court and is identified by learned advocate for the original complainant. The affidavit sworn by the original complainant is taken on record. On inquiry made by the Court, original complainant has declared before this Court that the dispute between the applicant and the original complainant is resolved and therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.
[7.0] At the outset, learned advocates for the respective parties have jointly submitted that matter is settled and now the original complainant does not wants to pursue for the further litigation as complainant and applicant have settled the matter and in this regard, affidavit of original complainant has been placed, which is taken on record. The contents of the affidavit is also admitted by the original complainant. Even complainant has remained present before this Court and stated that he has no objection if the conviction recorded by the learned Trial Court as well as Appellate Court is set aside.
[8.0] Considering the fact that the dispute is settled between the parties and the applicant has paid the cheque amount to the complainant and said fact has been confirmed by the complainant as offence is compoundable one at any stage under Section 147 of the NI Act. But, as accused has settled the dispute at belated stage Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by KUMAR ALOK(HC01091) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 03:57:33 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.RA/649/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 undefined before this Court, in view of the decision rendered in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H, reported in 2010(5) SCC 663, accused is required to be saddled with cost.
[9.0] Resultantly, this revision application is allowed. The order dated 20.04.2022 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Anjar-Kachchh in Criminal Case No.1490 of 2018 as well as the judgment and order of sentence dated 27.09.2023 passed in Criminal Appeal No.17 of 2022 by the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Anjar-Kachchh are hereby quashed and set aside with respect to the applicant, subject to deposit of 15% of the amount of cheque i.e. Rs.13,500/- (cheque amount of Rs.90,000/-) before the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority.
[10.0] On compliance of the said order, if the applicant is behind the bar, he shall be released subject to deposit of aforesaid amount of cost, if his presence is no longer required in any other criminal offence.
[11.0] The present application is allowed qua applicant. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) KUMAR ALOK Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by KUMAR ALOK(HC01091) on Thu May 01 2025 Downloaded on : Fri May 02 03:57:33 IST 2025