Gujarat High Court
Kartikbhai Jayeshbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 27 October, 2021
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/19275/2021 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 19275 of 2021
===============================================================
KARTIKBHAI JAYESHBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR DHRUV K DAVE(6928) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MRS KRINA CALLA APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 27/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Dhruv K. Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner,
Mrs. Krina Calla, learned APP for the respondent no. 1 and learned
advocate for the respondent no. 2 complainant.
2. By this application under Articles 226 and 227 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
07.10.2021 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge & Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Anklav in C.C No. 28 of 2020, by which, the
petitioner has been convicted for 1 year SI and also ordered to pay to the
respondent no.2 double the cheque amount or the cheque amount with
interest at 6% p.a. till realisation of amount, whichever is less and upon
failure to do so, a further imprisonment of 3 months.
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 no. 2, which has been confirmed by the
R/CR.MA/19275/2021 ORDER DATED: 27/10/2021
complainant by detailed affidavit, which has been placed 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 Company is willing to deposit
cost 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.
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, to record
the settlement arrived at between the parties and acquit the accused of the
charges.
6. Thus, taking into account the fact of settlement, the compounding
of the offence is hereby permitted. As a result, the petition is allowed.
The judgment order passed by the Courts below i.e. order dated
07.10.2021 and warrant issued by the trial Court, 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
10% 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)
P.S. JOSHI
