Gujarat High Court
Narvatbhai Raysing Pagi vs State Of Gujarat on 14 October, 2022
Bench: Niral R. Mehta
R/SCR.A/10940/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 10940 of 2022
==========================================================
NARVATBHAI RAYSING PAGI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRADIP J PATEL(5896) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VINOD MAROO, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MOXA THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA
Date : 14/10/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives
service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent - State
whereas learned advocate Mr.Vinod Maroo waives service of
notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2 - complainant.
2. By this petition under Articles 226/227 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 15th September, 2022 passed by
learned 3rd Additional Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Godhra in Criminal Case No.2421 of 2017,
whereby, the Court below has allowed the criminal case filed
by the complainant and the petitioner herein-original
respondent has been convicted for one years' simple
imprisonment and also directed to pay the compensation of
Rs.01,90,000/- and in default, petitioner was directed to
R/SCR.A/10940/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2022
undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of four
months.
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 petitioner 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 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
R/SCR.A/10940/2022 ORDER DATED: 14/10/2022
judgment order passed by the Court below i.e. order dated
15th September, 2022 passed by learned 3rd Additional
Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate First Class, Godhra in
Criminal Case No.2421 of 2017 is hereby quashed and set
aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the offences under the
provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
7. The petitioner is directed to deposit 15% of the
cheque amount with the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this
order.
Direct service permitted.
(NIRAL R. MEHTA,J)
ANUP
