Gujarat High Court
Shree Sai Rayons Thro Its Owner ... vs State Of Gujarat on 1 February, 2021
Bench: B.N. Karia
R/SCR.A/8964/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 8964 of 2020
==========================================================
SHREE SAI RAYONS THRO ITS OWNER ANKIT NAVINCHANDRA PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HARNISH V DARJI(3705) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MONALI BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA
Date : 01/02/2021
ORAL ORDER
Rule, returnable forthwith against respondent no.1 only.
Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of
the respondentState.
By way of present application, applicant has prayed to quash
and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 03.03.2020
passed by learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Criminal
Revision Application No.49 of 2020 and to restore Para5 of the
order passed below Exh.8, in Criminal Case No.65061 of 2019 and
has further prayed to stay the judgment and order dated
03.03.2020 passed by learned 7 th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat
in Criminal Revision Application No.49 of 2020.
R/SCR.A/8964/2020 ORDER
Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned APP for
the respondent no.1.
Considering the issue involved in the application, this Court
does not deem it fit to issue notice to respondent no.2.
Having heard learned advocate for the applicant as well as
learned APP for the respondentState, it appears that in Criminal
Case No.65061 of 2019 filed by the applicant under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as
"the N.I. Act" for short), summons was issued and it was duly
served to accused persons. Respondent no.2 had appeared before
the Court. Original complainant/present applicant filed an
application under the provisions of Section 143(A)(1) of the N.I.
Act, below Exh.8 on 06.08.2019. The said application was opposed
by respondent no.2. After hearing both the sides, learned 4th
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surat, vide order dated
27.08.2019 was pleased to allow the application below Exh.40 and
directed the accused to deposit 20% of cheque amount failing which
accused would not be allowed to present his defence. Further, if any
defence is produced, it would not be considered. The accused
preferred Application No.49 of 2020 before the learned 7 th
Additional Sessions Judge, Surat on 26.12.2019. After issuance of
R/SCR.A/8964/2020 ORDER
notice to present applicant, he approached the Court and filed his
reply below Exh.5. After hearing both the sides and after going
through the record, the learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat
was pleased to allow Criminal Revision Application No.49 of 2020
preferred by accused vide judgment and order dated 03.03.2020.
The learned Sessions Judge was pleased to hold that the order
passed by the learned Trial Court to the extent of prohibiting the
accused to produce his defence in the event of nonpayment of
interim compensation as per Para5 of the order dated 27.08.2019
was not legal and proper, and therefore, it was quashed and set
aside. Remaining order passed by the learned Trial Court of interim
compensation was not disturbed by the Revisional Court for getting
the interim compensation as prayed under Section 143(A)(1) of the
N.I. Act. It is worried by the applicant that if the interim
compensation would not be paid by the accused, he would suffer
great loss and therefore, order passed by the learned Trial Court
was legal and valid. Under section 143A(5), interim compensation
payable under this section may be recovered as if it were a fine
under Section 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is
submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that the interim
compensation was not deposited by the accused before the Court.
R/SCR.A/8964/2020 ORDER
Certainly the applicant would be entitled to get the remedy
available under the Act and approached the Competent Authority to
recover the amount of interim compensation awarded to him as per
the order passed by the Courtbelow by availing remedy provided
under Section 421 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. No
other issue remains to be decided considering the fact of the case.
With the above observations, present application stands
disposed of. Rule is discharged.
(B.N. KARIA, J)
rakesh/
