Gujarat High Court
Dhirubhai Mithubhai Jadeja vs State Of Gujarat on 22 July, 2022
Bench: Niral R. Mehta
R/CR.MA/12302/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 12302 of 2022
=================================================
DHIRUBHAI MITHUBHAI JADEJA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=================================================
Appearance:
MR LAXMANSINH M ZALA for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. PRANAV TRIVEDI, APP for Respondent(s) No. 1
=================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
Date : 22/07/2022
ORAL ORDER
Mr. Dave learned advocate shall file his
Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent No.2-
original complainant. Registry to accept
Vakalatnama of Mr. Dave, appearing on behalf of
respondent No.2.
1) Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Trivedi,
learned APP and Mr. Dave, 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 30.09.2019 passed by 2nd
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana &
Negotiable Instrument Act Court, Mahesana in
R/CR.MA/12302/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2022
Criminal Case No. 10332 of 2016, whereby, the
Court below has allowed the criminal case filed
by the complainant and the petitioner herein-
original respondent has been convicted for four
months of simple imprisonment and also directed
to pay an amount of Rs.6,40,000/- 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 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
R/CR.MA/12302/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/07/2022
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 30.09.2019 passed by 2nd Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana & Negotiable
Instrument Act Court, Mahesana in Criminal Case
No. 10332 of 201 is hereby quashed and set aside.
7) The petitioner is acquitted of the offences
under the provisions of the Negotiable
Instruments Act. The petitioner is directed to
deposit 15% of the 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.
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
VISHAL MISHRA
