Gujarat High Court
Mahammad Mohsin Sirazahamad Memon vs State Of Gujarat on 11 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12370/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 12370
of 2025
============================================
MAHAMMAD MOHSIN SIRAZAHAMAD MEMON
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
============================================
Appearance:
MR RAHUL RAJHANS(12788) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 11/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
Learned Advocate Mr. Rauhan R. Gogda, state that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant, and thereby, seeks permission to file vakalatnama. The Registry is directed to accept the vakalatnama.
1) Rule. Learned Advocates waives service of rule for the respective respondents.
2) By this petition under Articles 226 and 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 17.10.2024, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Wankaner, District Morbi, in Criminal Case No.2623 of 2022, by which the petitioner has been convicted and ordered to undergo imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay the amount of Rs.12,00,000/- 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 one month and as the petitioner was not present when the Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 05:55:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/12370/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025 undefined judgment was pronounced, the learned Magistrate issued warrant 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, the complainant is present in-person who has admitted the factum of settlement and filed his Affidavit dated 11.09.2025, which 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 in present in the Court and affirms the factum of settlement as well as filing of affidavit by him.
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 / Section 528 of the BNSS, to record the settlement arrived at between the parties, merely alternate remedy available is not a ground to refuse to compromise as offence is bailable and compoundable one.
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 17.10.2024, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 05:55:15 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/12370/2025 ORDER DATED: 11/09/2025 undefined Magistrate, Wankaner, District Morbi, in Criminal Case No.2623 of 2022, and warrant issued by it are 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 i.e. Rs.1,80,000/- with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Rule is made absolute to aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ANKIT Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109) on Fri Sep 12 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Sep 13 05:55:15 IST 2025