Gujarat High Court
Vijaybhai Pritamdas Sahatiya vs State Of Gujarat on 27 October, 2021
Bench: Umesh A. Trivedi
R/CR.RA/720/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 720 of 2021
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy
of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India or any order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
VIJAYBHAI PRITAMDAS SAHATIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
ANILKUMAR N MUNDRA(9205) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
SAMARTH S AMIN(8897) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS CM SHAH APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
SAGAR J SHAH(9447) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
Date : 27/10/2021
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Mr.Sagar J. Shah, learned advocate for the Respondent
No.2-original complainant submitted that he has filed affidavit in-
reply affirmed on 12th October, 2021 stating therein that, the
matter is settled between the parties and as per the terms, the
R/CR.RA/720/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/10/2021
payment is received by the complainant. It is further stated in it
that in view thereof, if judgment of conviction and order of
sentence is quashed and set aside, he has no objection to it. The
said complainant is also present before the Court and duly
identified by Mr.Sagr J. Shah, learned advocate representing him.
2. RULE. Ms..C.M.Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.1 -
State and Shri Sagar J. Shah, learned advocate, waives service of
notice of rule on behalf of respondent no.2.
3. This Criminal Revision Application is directed against an
order passed by the learned 4 th Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bhavnagar, dated 06.01.2020 in Criminal Case
No.5777 of 2017 convicting the applicant for an offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and ordered him to
undergo 6 months Simple Imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/-.
Over and above that, Rs.49,000/- being the cheque amount, was
ordered to be paid to the complainant as compensation and in
default of payment of compensation, he is ordered to further
undergo one month Simple Imprisonment. The said judgment of
conviction and order of sentence was carried in Appeal being
Criminal Appeal No.11 of 2020 which also came to be dismissed
by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar ide order
dated 28.09.2021. Both these orders are under challenge in this
Criminal Revision Application.
4. However, in view of compounding arrived at between the
parties and when the matter is settled between them, pursuant
to which the cheque amount is already paid to the
R/CR.RA/720/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/10/2021
complainant, as disclosed in the affidavit, the judgment of
conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned
Magistrate is required to be quashed and set aside. In view of
Section 147 of 'the Act', when offence is made compoundable,
the genuine compounding entered into between the parties is
required to be encouraged. Considering the affidavit, it is clear
that the compounding is genuine, and therefore, the impugned
judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the
learned 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhavnagar
dated 06.01.2020 in Criminal Case No.5777 of 2017 confirmed
by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar by
order dated 28.09.2021 in Criminal Appeal No.11 of 2020 are
hereby quashed and set aside.
5. In view of sub-section (8) of Section 320 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant is acquitted of the
charge levelled against him. Since the compounding between
the parties is arrived at revisional stage before this Court, the
applicant is required to be imposed cost in view of the decision
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Damodar S.
Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal reported in AIR 2010 SC 1907.
The applicant is required to deposit Rs.7,000/- somewhat less
than 15% of the cheque amount towards costs to the Gujarat
State Legal Services Authority within a period of two weeks
from today. If the applicant fails to deposit the said amount
within the time prescribed, as aforesaid, he shall be taken into
custody by issuing non-bailable warrant by the learned trial
Court and the present order shall stand automatically recalled
and he would serve the sentence. Registry is hereby directed
to issue final writ of this revision application after ascertaining
that the aforesaid cost amount is deposited by the applicant.
R/CR.RA/720/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/10/2021
6. Accordingly, the present Criminal Revision Application
shall stand disposed of as allowed. Rule is made absolute to
the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(UMESH A. TRIVEDI, J)
ASHISH M. GADHIYA
