Gujarat High Court
Rajivratna @ Rajubhai Babubhai ... vs State Of Gujarat on 27 September, 2021
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/SCR.A/8526/2021 ORDER DATED: 27/09/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 8526 of 2021
==========================================================
RAJIVRATNA @ RAJUBHAI BABUBHAI JOSHI (DIRECTOR OF SHREE
VINAYAK FOODS AND FABRICS PVT. LTD.)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BHADRISH S RAJU WITH MR SHAHIL A SARWANI(8432) for the
Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RUCHIT J VYAS(10687) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SS PATHAK APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 27/09/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. SS Pathak, learned APP and Mr.
Ruchit J. Vyas, 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
22.04.20219 passed by the learned 12th Additional Sessions Judge,
Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2018, whereby, the learned
Sessions Court has rejected the Appeal, confirming the judgment and
order dated 19.12.2017 passed by the learned 10 th Additional Judicial
Magistrate, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 8840 of 2015, by which,
the petitioner has been convicted for 1 month SI and fine of Rs.5000/-
and also directed to pay the cheque amount of Rs.1,47,047/- as a
compensation 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
R/SCR.A/8526/2021 ORDER DATED: 27/09/2021
paid to the respondent no. 2, which has been confirmed by the
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 cased 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. The judgment order passed by the Courts below
i.e. order dated 19.12.2017 and 22.04.2019 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 15% 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
