Gujarat High Court
Dipakbhai Heerabhai Mahida vs State Of Gujarat on 5 September, 2022
Bench: Samir J. Dave
R/CR.RA/82/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 82 of 2022
==========================================================
DIPAKBHAI HEERABHAI MAHIDA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS RV ACHARYA(1124) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS G R VIJAYALAKSHMI(5047) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MH BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE
Date : 05/09/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of
notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1-State
and learned advocate Ms. G R Vijayalakshmi waives service of
notice for and on behalf of the respondent no.2.
2. By way of present application, applicant has prayed to
quash and set aside the judgment and order dated 13.11.2019
passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vaso in
Criminal Case No. 254 of 2018 as well as judgment and order
dated 24.12.2021 passed by learned Principal District Judge,
Kheda at Nadiad in Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2019 and
suspend the sentence imposed upon him as well as release him
on bail till hearing and final disposal of the present revision
R/CR.RA/82/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2022
application.
3. On depositing the amount of Rs. 37,500/- by the
applicant, as per order dated 31.01.2022 passed by the
coordinate bench of this Court in the present matter, the
applicant was released on bail till hearing and final disposal of
the present revision application.
4. Today, when the matter was called out, learned advocates
for the respective parties have made submissions that the
dispute has been resolved amicably between the parties and
both the parties are not intended to proceed further with the
proceedings of the present matter.
5. The Apex Court in the case of Vinay Devanna Nayak V/s
Ryot Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported in AIR 2008 SC 716 has
observed as under in paras 17 and 18 of the judgment :
"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 efficacy of banking operations and ensures
R/CR.RA/82/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2022
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."
6. Applying the ratio of the aforesaid decision of the Apex
Court to the facts of the present case as well as considering the
settlement arrived at between the parties and entire amount
cheque and fine has been paid by the applicant, present
application is required to be allowed and the parties be
permitted to compound the offence.
7. In the result, present revision application is allowed. The
judgment and order dated 13.11.2019 passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vaso in Criminal Case No. 254
of 2018 as well as judgment and order dated 24.12.2021
passed by learned Principal District Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in
Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2019 stand quashed and set aside.
The applicants-accused is acquitted of the charge under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Bail bonds, if
R/CR.RA/82/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2022
any, stands cancelled.
8. Original complainant-respondent no.2 is permitted to
withdraw the amount deposited by the original accused-
revisionist before the trial court.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(SAMIR J. DAVE,J)
K. S. DARJI
