Gujarat High Court
Rathod Gitaba Siddharjsinh vs State Of Gujarat on 12 January, 2023
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
R/CR.MA/745/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/01/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 745 of 2023
==========================================================
RATHOD GITABA SIDDHARJSINH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HIMANISH J JAPEE(11295) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 12/01/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Ms. Priyanka Thakkar, learned advocate states that
she has instructions to appear for the respondent no.2-
original complainant and seeks permission to file
Vakalatnama with the Registry. Permission is granted.
Registry is directed to accept the same.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Manan Maheta, learned
APP and Ms. Priyanka Thakkar, learned advocate waive
service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of respondent
nos.1 and 2 respectively.
3. By this application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,
the applicant has sought quashing of the judgment and
order dated 15.12.2022 passed by learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Dhansura in Criminal Case No.64 of
R/CR.MA/745/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/01/2023
2018 by which the applicant has been convicted for 1 year
SI and also directed to deposit fine amount of Rs.25,000/-.
4. It appears that the settlement has been arrived at
between the complainant and the present applicant and
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 applicant by
filing this application, seeks compounding of the offence
under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
5. The applicant also submits that the applicant 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.
6. 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.
7. Thus, taking into account the fact of settlement, the
compounding of the offence is hereby permitted. As a
R/CR.MA/745/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/01/2023
result, the application is hereby allowed. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent. The judgment and order
dated 15.12.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Dhansura in Criminal Case No.64 of 2018 and
warrant issued by the trial Court, are hereby quashed and
set aside. The applicant is acquitted of the offences under
the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The
applicant is directed to deposit an amount of Rs.12,000/-
with the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority within a
period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order.
Direct service is permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
TAUSIF SAIYED
