Gujarat High Court
Anandkumar Tarunkumar Patel vs M/S Hubergroup India Pvt Ltd. Thro ... on 19 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/15081/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 15081 of 2025
==========================================================
ANANDKUMAR TARUNKUMAR PATEL & ANR.
Versus
M/s HUBERGROUP INDIA PVT LTD. THRO JAYDEEP PATEL & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR LAKSHIT V PATEL(10734) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR. DHAWAN JAYSWAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
Date : 19/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The Petitioners (Original Accused Nos. 2 and 3) have filed this Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the following prayers:
"(A) To allow this application.
(B) To direct the Ld. Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Vapi, Dist: Valsad to accept the application under section 389(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of sentence for preferring the appeal before the Ld. District and Sessions Court, Vapi, Dist. Valsad connection with the order of conviction dated 30.09.2025 passed in the Criminal case no. 1254 of 2018 and further be pleased to convert the Non bailable warrant in bailable;
(C) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this application, to stay implementation and operation of the order of conviction dated 30.09.2025 passed by the Ld. Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Va;pi, Dist: Valsad in Criminal case no. 1254 of 2018;Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:52:15 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/15081/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/11/2025 undefined (D) To pass any other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper."
2. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioners and learned APP for the Respondent - State.
3. Learned Advocate for the Petitioners has submitted that the learned Trial Court vide judgment and order dated 30.09.2025 passed in Criminal Case No. 1254 of 2018 had convicted the present Petitioners for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and since the Petitioners were not present when the judgment of conviction was pronounced by the trial court, the learned trial court had ordered to issue arrest warrant against the Petitioners. And, since the said arrest warrant is in operation, the Petitioners are not a position to file appeal against the order of conviction as they are apprehending their arrest pursuant to the arrest warrant issued against them once they approache the appellate court for filing the appeal. He submitted that the Petitioners are willing to compound the offence for which they are convicted. He therefore submitted that the arrest warrant issued against the Petitioners be converted into a bailable warrant to enable them to file appeal against the order of conviction. He therefore submitted to allow the present Petition.
4. Learned APP has opposed the Application.
5. Heard learned Advocates for the parties. From the material available on record, it appears that after the complaint against the Petitioners for an offence punishable under Section 138 of NIA was registered in the trial court, a process was ordered to be issued against the Petitioners. However, despite repeated attempts to serve the process upon the Petitioners, the Petitioners have successfully evaded service of process as well as warrant issued by the trial Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:52:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/15081/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/11/2025 undefined court upon them, and therefore, the trial court was constrained to proceed against the Petitioners ex parte and the order of conviction was passed against the Petitioners and even at the stage of pronouncement of judgment of conviction also, the Petitioners were not present before the court, and therefore, the trial court ordered issuance of arrest warrant against them.
5.1 These facts reflect the conduct on part of the Petitioners of showing utter disregard to the judicial process. It is also required to be noted that after the order of conviction was passed, the Petitioners have not filed appeal against the said judgment of conviction and have approached this court directly with the aforesaid prayers.
5.2 The appellate court has all the powers to suspend the sentence imposed upon the Petitioners after considering the merits of the case. The present Petition is thus absolutely premature and misconceived. Hence dismissed.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J) J.N.W / 14 Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by J.N. WAGHELA(HC00178) on Fri Nov 21 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 21 23:52:15 IST 2025