Gujarat High Court
Dilipsinh Prabhatsinh Rana vs State Of Gujarat on 13 April, 2022
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/SCR.A/3709/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3709 of 2022
==========================================================
DILIPSINH PRABHATSINH RANA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. DHAVAL G BAROT(6546) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
SANKET K PANDYA(9451) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR RAJDEEP JODHA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS KRINA CALLA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 13/04/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Calla, learned APP and Mr. Pandya
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
28.02.2022 passed by 7th Additional CJMFC, Gandhinagar, in
Criminal Case No.7626/2019, by which, the petitioner has been
convicted for 1 year SI for the offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act
and also directed to pay Rs.21,50,000/- 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 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
R/SCR.A/3709/2022 ORDER DATED: 13/04/2022
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 and order
dated 28.02.2022 passed by 7th Additional CJMFC, Gandhinagar, in
Criminal Case No.7626/2019 is hereby quashed and set aside. The
petitioner is acquitted from 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)
SUCHIT
