Gujarat High Court
Bhatt Jagatkumar Jayantilal vs State Of Gujarat on 30 September, 2021
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/16551/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 16551 of 2021
==========================================================
BHATT JAGATKUMAR JAYANTILAL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP (2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 30/09/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. By this application under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, the applicant has sought quashing of
the judgment and order dated 03.09.2019 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court,
Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 199 of 2019, whereby,
the learned Sessions Court has rejected the Appeal,
confirming the judgment and order dated 13.02.2019
passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Court No.28, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No.
260 of 2014, by which, the applicant has been convicted
for 2 years SI and to pay double the amount of cheque as
compensation to the complainant, in default, to undergo SI
for a further period of six months.
2. Mr. Mahesh Purohit, learned advocate states that he
has instructions to appear for the respondent no.2-original
complainant and seeks permission to file Vakalatnama
R/CR.MA/16551/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2021
with the Registry. Permission is granted. Registry is
directed to accept the same.
3. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. SS Pathak, learned APP
and Mr. Mahesh Purohit, learned advocate waives service
of notice of Rule for and on behalf of respondent Nos. 1
and 2 respectively.
4. It appears that the settlement has been arrived at
between the complainant and present applicant and the
entire cheque amount has been paid to the respondent
no. 2, which has been confirmed by the complainant by
detailed affidavit, which is already on record at Annexure-
D to this application. The complainant do not wish to
proceed further and is willing to compound the offence.
Accordingly, the applicant by filing this application, seeks
compounding of the offence under Section 147 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act.
5. The applicant also submits that the applicant 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.
6. 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
R/CR.MA/16551/2021 ORDER DATED: 30/09/2021
accused of the charges.
7. Thus, taking into account the fact of settlement, the
compounding of the offence is hereby permitted. As a
result, the application is allowed. Rule is made absolute.
The judgment order passed by the Courts below i.e. order
dated 03.09.2019 and 13.02.2019 and warrant issued by
the trial Court, are hereby quashed and set aside. The
applicant is acquitted of the offences under the provisions
of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The applicant is
directed to deposit the amount of Rs.8,000/- with the
Gujarat State Legal Service Authority within a period of 2
weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The applicant
is permitted to withdraw the amount of Rs.15,300/-
deposited by him before the trial Court and the trial Court
shall disburse the amount in favour of the applicant. Direct
service permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
TAUSIF SAIYED
