Gujarat High Court
Haiderbhai Pratapsingh Raj vs State Of Gujarat on 28 October, 2021
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/SCR.A/10813/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 10813 of 2021
==========================================================
HAIDERBHAI PRATAPSINGH RAJ
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.NANDISH H THACKAR(7008) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PREMAL RANCH 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 : 28/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mrs. Krina Calla learned APP and Mr.
Premal Ranch, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule for and
on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively.
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
27.09.2021 passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch
in Criminal Appeal No. 109 of 2018, whereby, the learned Sessions Court
has rejected the Appeal, confirming the judgment and order dated
28.08.2018 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bharuch in Criminal Case No. 3413 of 2016, by which, the
petitioner has been convicted for 2 years SI and was also directed to pay
the compensation of Rs. 8,50,000/- to the complainant.
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
complainant by detailed affidavit, which has been placed on record. The
R/SCR.A/10813/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021
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.
Rule is made absolute to aforesaid extent. The judgment order passed by
the Courts below i.e. judgment and order dated 28.08.2018 passed by the
learned 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharuch in Criminal
Case No. 3413 of 2016 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
