Gujarat High Court
Patel Rameshbhai Ranchhodbhai vs State Of Gujarat on 13 March, 2023
Bench: Samir J. Dave
R/CR.MA/4694/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 4694 of 2023
==========================================================
PATEL RAMESHBHAI RANCHHODBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS VIRAL A DETROJA, for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS CM SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SAMIR J. DAVE
Date : 13/03/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Ms. Viral A. Detroja, learned advocate states that she has
received instructions to appear for and on behalf of the
respondent no.2 and sought permission to appear on behalf of
the respondent no.2. Permission; as sought for; stands granted.
She shall file her Vakalatnama before the Registry. Registry
shall accept the same.
2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule for and
on behalf of the respondent no.1-State and learned advocate
Ms. Viral A. Detroja, waives service of notice of rule for and on
behalf of the respondent no2.
3. By way of present application, the applicant has
requested to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated
R/CR.MA/4694/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2023
26.03.2021 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Dhansura in Criminal Case No. 446 of 2019 for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act as compromise has been arrived at between the parties.
4. Considering the issue involved in the present application
and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties as well as considering the fact that the
dispute amongst the applicant and complainant has been
resolved amicably, this matter is taken up for final disposal
forthwith.
5. Learned counsel for the respective parties submitted that
after passing aforesaid order of conviction, as referred to
above, the parties have amicably settled their issue by way of
mutual settlement and pursuant to understanding arrived at,
the Complainant has accordingly filed an affidavit, which is on
record. The complainant has categorically stated in the
affidavit that dispute is amicably resolved and has no
objections if the impugned order is quashed as there is no
surviving grievance between them.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective
parties, considering the facts and circumstances arising out of
the present application as well as taking into consideration the
decision rendered in the cases of Vinay Devanna Nayak V/s
R/CR.MA/4694/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2023
Ryot Seva Sahakari Bank Ltd. reported in AIR 2008 SC 716,
Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein it is observed 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
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."
7. 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 contents of the
affidavit filed by the respondent no.2, I am of the opinion that
the present application is required to be allowed and the
R/CR.MA/4694/2023 ORDER DATED: 13/03/2023
parties be permitted to compound the offence.
8. In the result, present application is allowed. The
judgment and order dated 26.03.2021 passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Dhansura in Criminal Case No.
446 of 2019 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act stands quashed and set aside.
The applicant-accused is acquitted of the charge under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Bail bonds, if any,
stands cancelled.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.
(SAMIR J. DAVE,J)
K. S. DARJI
