Chetana Swapnil Patel vs State Of Gujarat

Gujarat High Court

Chetana Swapnil Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 1 May, 2025

                                                                                                                     NEUTRAL CITATION




                             R/SCR.A/4593/2025                                        ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025

                                                                                                                     undefined




                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                        R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
                                               4593 of 2025

                       ==========================================================
                                                      CHETANA SWAPNIL PATEL
                                                              Versus
                                                     STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MS MEENA VYAS(3315) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
                       MR BHAVESH K AHIR(7279) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
                       MR CHINTAN DAVE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
                       SHRIJIT G PILLAI(7937) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
                       ==========================================================

                            CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI

                                                          Date : 01/05/2025

                                                             ORAL ORDER

1. By way of preferring present petition, the petitioner seeks to invoke extra-ordinary and inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 08.12.2023 passed by learned 4th Additional Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Criminal Case No.10017 of 2020 as well as order dated 03.02.2025 passed by learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Criminal Appeal No.75 of 2024, whereby, the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Court has been upheld, and terminating all the proceedings arising thereunder qua the petitioner.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4593/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 undefined

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

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner 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 and identified by learned advocate for respondent No.2. The learned advocate for respondent No. 2 - original complainant states that the complainant has received 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.

4. 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 08.12.2023 passed by learned 4th Additional Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Criminal Case No.10017 of 2020 as well as order dated 03.02.2025 passed by learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Criminal Appeal No.75 of 2024, are hereby quashed and set aside.

NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4593/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 undefined

5. 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.

6. 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.

7. Considering the reasons given by learned advocate for the petitioner, 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 also tendered an undertaking of the petitioner, wherein, she has shown her willingness to deposit the amount of cost as deem fit by this Court.

8. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed subject to deposit of 10% of the cheque amount with the High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of two months from today. Rule is made Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri May 02 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 03 16:23:10 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/4593/2025 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2025 undefined absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.

(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) LAVKUMAR J JANI Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by LAVKUMAR J JANI(HC00210) on Fri May 02 2025 Downloaded on : Sat May 03 16:23:10 IST 2025