Gitaben Arvindbhai Parmar vs The State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 4541 Guj

        R/SCR.A/1896/2021                                   ORDER




      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

    R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1896 of 2021
==========================================================
                       GITABEN ARVINDBHAI PARMAR
                                  Versus
                          THE STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.HARDIK BHARHMBHAT(3741) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
Ms. Monali Bhatt, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
SANKUL K KABRA(9304) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

                            Date : 22/03/2021

                             ORAL ORDER

Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of

notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent No.1.

By way of present application, applicant has prayed to

quash and set aside the impugned judgment of conviction and

sentence dated 30.12.2020 passed by the learned Judicial

Magistrate First Class, Umreth in Criminal Case No. 915 of

2019 and all other consequential proceedings therefrom qua

the present applicant.

Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and

learned APP for the respondent­State.

Learned advocate for the applicant submits that after

delivering the judgment by the learned Judge, compromise

R/SCR.A/1896/2021 ORDER

was arrived at between the parties i.e. applicant and

respondent No.2. That, the cheque amount is paid by the

present applicant to the respondent No.2 and settlement has

been arrived at between the parties. Hence, he has requested

to quash and set aside the impugned judgment of conviction.

Looking to the nature of the offence, learned APP for the

respondent ­State has requested not to quash the impugned

judgment of conviction.

Learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has submitted

that compromise has been arrived at amicably between the

parties and in this connection, the respondent No.2 has filed

his affidavit declaring that the compromise has been arrived at

between the parties and he has no objection if the impugned

judgment delivered against present applicant is quashed.

On a request being made by learned advocate for the

respondent No.2, respondent No.2 - Bipinchandra Umedbhai

Patel was permitted to appear before this Court through video

conferencing. He has filed his affidavit under his signature and

admitted that the contents averred in the affidavit are correct

R/SCR.A/1896/2021 ORDER

and true. In this connection, respondent No.2 has filed his

affidavit which is reproduced as under:­

1. That, I state and submit that I initially in capacity of original complainant did register a case against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act which was registered as Criminal Case No. 915 of 2019, by which the petitioner is held guilty by the trial Court vide judgment and order dated 30.12.2020 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Umreth.

2. That, I state and submit that pursuant to petitioner being held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the development now so occurred between me and the petitioner of the above captioned petition is that now, petitioner has already paid Rs.20,000/­ to me. Therefore, I in capacity of the original complainant of the case today do not have any objection, if the conviction and sentence so imposed upon the petitioner is permitted to be compounded by this Court thereby resorting to Section 147 of the Act as also she is ordered to be acquitted from the charges under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.

Learned advocate for the respondent no.2 has identified

the respondent no.2 as well as his signature in his affidavit.

This Court has considered the fact that nature of the

offence is private and do not have a serious impact from the

society. Considering the nature of the offence and settlement

arrived at between the parties including the complainant/first

R/SCR.A/1896/2021 ORDER

informant, this Court is required to consider the prayer made

by the accused.

Considering the submissions made by learned advocate

for the applicant, learned advocate for the respondent no.2 as

well as learned APP for the respondent­State and also the ratio

laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Damodar

S.Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H. reported in AIR 2010 SC

1907, the applicant is required to pay 15% of the cheque

amount by way of cost with the High Court State Legal

Services Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid

down in the said decision. It appears that as per the contents

of affidavit of the respondent no.2, compromise has been

arrived at between the applicant and respondent no.2 and

therefore, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence

dated 30.12.2020 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate

First Class, Umreth in Criminal Case No. 915 of 2019 and all

other consequential proceedings therefrom stands quashed

and set aside qua present applicant.

Present application stands allowed and accordingly,

R/SCR.A/1896/2021 ORDER

stands disposed of.

Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

Registry shall forward a copy of this order to the

concerned police station as well concerned Court through fax

or e­mail forthwith.

(B.N. KARIA, J) BEENA SHAH