Gujarat High Court
Aarifkhan Ayyubkhan Pathan vs State Of Gujarat on 13 October, 2021
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/SCR.A/10175/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 10175 of 2021
==========================================================
AARIFKHAN AYYUBKHAN PATHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
SAN ASSOCIATES LLP(8655) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 13/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Mr. Anant Anand Singh, learned advocate states that
he has instructions to appear for the respondent no.2 -
original complainant and seeks permission to file his
Vakalatnama for and on behalf of respondent no.2 with
the Registry. Permission is granted. Registry is directed to
accept the same.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Shruti Pathak, learned
APP and Mr. Anant Anand Singh, learned advocate waive
service of notice of rule on behalf of the respective
respondents. With the consent of learned advocates on
both the sides, the matter is heard finally.
3. By this application under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has sought quashing of
the judgment and order dated 25.08.2021 passed by
R/SCR.A/10175/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2021
learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Himmatnagar in Criminal Case No.592 of 2014, by which,
the petitioner has been convicted for 6 months SI and to
make payment to the tune of Rs.30,000/- as fine to be
paid to the original complainant and in default, further SI
for 15 days was imposed.
4. 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
no. 2, which has been confirmed by the complainant by
deed of settlement, which has been annexed at Annexure-
B to this petition. 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.
5. The petitioner also submits that the petitioner is
willing to deposit cost as directed by the Supreme Court in
cased of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H.,
reported in (2010) 5 SCC 633, with the Legal Service
Authority.
6. 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, to record the
settlement arrived at between the parties and acquit the
R/SCR.A/10175/2021 ORDER DATED: 13/10/2021
accused of the charges.
7. Thus, taking into account the fact of settlement, the
compounding of the offence is hereby permitted. As a
result, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute. The
judgment and order dated 25.08.2021 passed by learned
2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Himmatnagar in
Criminal Case No.592 of 2014 is hereby quashed and set
aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the offences under the
provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act and also
directed to be released from the Jail immediately. The
petitioner is directed to deposit 5% of the cheque amount
with the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority within a
period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
Direct service permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
TAUSIF SAIYED
