Gujarat High Court
Pradipbhai Hashmukhbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 18 October, 2022
Bench: Samir J. Dave
R/CR.RA/1098/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/10/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1098 of 2022
==========================================================
PRADIPBHAI HASHMUKHBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR P P MAJMUDAR(5284) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR RC KODEKAR APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE
Date : 18/10/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this revision application, the applicant-original
accused has prayed to quash and set aside the judgment and
order dated 20.07.2021 passed by the learned Addl. Senior
Civil Judge & Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in
Criminal Case No.24712 of 2019 as also the judgment and
order dated 15.09.2022 passed by the learned 4 th Addl.
Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Criminal Appeal No.100 of 2021.
2. Learned advocate Mr. M.A. Thakkar states that he has
instructions to appear on behalf of respondent No.2 - original
complainant in this matter. He is permitted to file his
Vakalatnama with the Registry.
R/CR.RA/1098/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/10/2022
3. Learned advocates on both the sides jointly stated that
the parties have settled the dispute amicably outside the Court.
The respondent No.2 has also filed an Affidavit wherein, she
has averred that the dispute between her and the applicant has
been amicably resolved and that she has received an amount
of Rs.4,10,000/- from the applicant by cheque. She has also
averred that she may be granted permission to withdraw
Rs.1,40,000/- deposited by the applicant before the trial Court
and thereby, stated that she has no objection if the impugned
orders passed by the Courts below are quashed and set aside
and the applicant-accused is released from the jail.
4. Considering the background facts, a reference to the
judgment of Apex Court in the case of Vinay Devanna Nayak
Vs Ryot Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported in AIR 2008 SC 716
would be apposite. In paras - 17 & 18 of the judgment, it has
been observed thus :
"17. As observed by this Court in Electronic Trade &
Technology Development Corporation Ltd. V. Indian
Technologists and Engineers, (1996) 2 SCC 739, the
object of bringing Section 138 in the statute book is to
inculcate faith in the efficacy of banking operation and
credibility in transacting business on negotiable
instruments. The provision is intended to prevent
dishonesty on the party of the drawer of negotiable
instruments in issuing cheques without sufficient funds or
with a view to inducing the payee or holder in due
course to act upon it. It thus seeks to promote the
R/CR.RA/1098/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/10/2022
efficacy of banking operations and ensures credibility in
transacting business through cheques. In such matters,
therefore, normally compounding of offences should not
be denied. Presumably, Parliament also realized this
aspect and inserted Section 147 by the Negotiable
Instruments (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions)
Act, 2002 (Act 55 of 2002)".
18. Taking into consideration even the said provision
(Section 147) and the primary object underlying Section
138, in our judgment, there is no reason to refuse
compromise between the parties. We therefore dispose of
the appeal on the basis of the settlement arrived at
between the appellant and the respondent."
5. In the present case, the parties have arrived at an out of
Court settlement of the dispute and the respondent-complainant
has filed an affidavit to that effect, which is on record.
Considering the above aspects and in view of the principle laid
down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decision, this Court
is of the opinion that the parties could be permitted to
compound the offence since no fruitful purpose would be
served in continuing with the litigation as it would lead to
wastage of precious judicial time.
6. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned
judgment and order dated 20.07.2021 passed by the learned
Addl. Senior Civil Judge & Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Vadodara in Criminal Case No.24712 of 2019 as also the
R/CR.RA/1098/2022 ORDER DATED: 18/10/2022
judgment and order dated 15.09.2022 passed by the learned 4 th
Addl. Sessions Judge, Vadodara in Criminal Appeal No.100 of
2021 are quashed and set aside. The applicant-accused is
acquitted of all the charges levelled against him and he is
ordered to be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required in
connection with any other case. The respondent-complainant
shall be at liberty to withdraw the amount of Rs.1,40,000/-
deposited by the applicant before the trial Court in connection
with the present proceeding. Rule is made absolute. Direct
service is permitted.
(SAMIR J. DAVE, J)
PRAVIN KARUNAN
