Jitendrabhai Ashokbhai ... vs Chiragbhai Mithabhai Limbasiya
2021 Latest Caselaw 13640 Guj

     R/CR.RA/605/2021                              ORDER DATED: 08/09/2021



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 605 of 2021
====================================================
            JITENDRABHAI ASHOKBHAI JINJUVADIA
                            Versus
              CHIRAGBHAI MITHABHAI LIMBASIYA
====================================================
Appearance:
MR. HEMAL SHAH(6960) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VISHAL C MEHTA(6152) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS. JIRGA JHAVERI, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
====================================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI

                             Date : 08/09/2021

                              ORAL ORDER

1. RULE. Mr. Vishal Mehta, learned advocate and Ms. Jirga

Jhaveri, learned APP, waive service of notice of rule for and on behalf of

respective respondents.

2. This Revision Application is filed challenging the judgment

of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned 3 rd Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot, dated 19.10.2019 in Criminal Case

No.11238 of 2017, whereby the applicant - accused came to be convicted

for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

(hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and was ordered to undergo one year

simple imprisonment. Over and above that, the applicant - accused was

ordered to pay an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation to the

original complainant within 60 days therefrom and in default of payment

R/CR.RA/605/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2021

thereof, the applicant - accused was further ordered to undergo 6 months

simple imprisonment. The said judgment of conviction and order of

sentence was further carried in Appeal by the applicant - accused. The

learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot, by order dated 07.08.2021

passed in Criminal appeal No.302 of 2019 confirmed the order passed by

the learned Trial Court. Both these orders are challenged before this

Court in this Revision Application.

3. The parties have settled their disputes outside the Court. The

compromise deed signed by the original complainant, who is present

before the Court and duly identified by his advocate, states that the

agreed amount between the parties has already been paid to him, and

therefore, there is no grievance remaining to be carried out further. At the

same time, it is stated in the compromise deed that if the judgment of

conviction and order of sentence passed against the applicant - accused is

quashed and set aside, he has no objection for the same.

4. 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 averments made in

the compromise deed, signed by both the parties, and when the agreed

amount is already paid, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence

passed by the learned 3rd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot,

R/CR.RA/605/2021 ORDER DATED: 08/09/2021

dated 19.10.2019 in Criminal Case No.11238 of 2017 and the order

passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot, dated

07.08.2021 in Criminal appeal No.302 of 2019, 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 - accused is acquitted of the

charge levelled against him.

6. 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 15% of the cheque amount i.e.

Rs.75,000/- towards the cost to the Gujarat State Legal Services

Authority, Ahmedabad, within a period of six weeks from today. If the

applicant fails to deposit the said amount within the time prescribed, as

aforesaid, he shall be taken in custody by issuing non-bailable warrant by

the learned Trial Court and the present order shall stand automatically

recalled. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of in view of

above. Rule is made absolute to the above extent.

(UMESH A. TRIVEDI, J) Lalji Desai