Gujarat High Court
Manoj Vasudev Sompura vs State Of Gujarat on 5 September, 2023
Bench: Hasmukh D. Suthar
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1015/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1015 of 2023
==========================================================
MANOJ VASUDEV SOMPURA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
ADITYA A GUPTA(7875) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MR BOMI H SETHNA(5864) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR L B DABHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 05/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on
behalf of the respondent - State of Gujarat.
2. By way of the present application, the applicant seeks
following prayers:
"a) YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED to issue a writ
of certiorari, prohibition and/or any other writ,
direction or order to quash and set aside impugned
judgment and order dated 08/08/2023 passed in
Criminal Appeal No.325 of 2023 passed by the Ld.
Sessions Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, at
Ahmedabad, at Annexure A (Colly) and to further
allow the application seeking deletion of condition E
in the judgment and order dated 09.06.2023
annexed at Annexure R (Colly), in the interest of
justice;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1015/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
b) YOUR LORDSHIPS BE PLEASED to BE
PLEASED TO grant interim bail or extend / continue
interim bail / suspension of sentence dated
09.06.2023 in the above criminal case pending
hearing and final disposal of this application in the
interest of justice;"
3. The applicant is seeking deletion of Condition-'E'
imposed vide judgment and order dated 09.06.2023 passed
below Exh.4 in Criminal Appeal No.325 of 2023 by the learned
Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad, which reads as
under:
"It is further made clear that if applicant is failed to
deposit the amount of 20% of the cheque amount
within 60 days from today and/or failed to furnish a
personal bond before the Ld. Trial Court within
seven days then the bail bond will be automatically
cancelled and necessary action will be taken by the
Ld. Trial Court against the applicant - accused as
per law."
4. At the outset, learned advocate for the applicant submits
that he has paid more than 20% of the cheque amount and
remaining 20% amount is required to be adjusted, which has
been ordered by the learned Appellate Court, vide order dated
09.06.2023 passed below application under Section 389(1) of
the CrPC.
5. The learned appellate Court has been pleased to allow
the application under Section 389(1) of the CrPC and directed
the accused to deposit 20% amount of cheque before the Nazir
within a period of 60 days on furnishing a personal bond of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1015/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of like amount within seven
days from the date of release of the applicant. Then, the
applicant has preferred another application Exh.10 seeking
modification of earlier bail order dated 09.06.2023 by deleting
Condition No.-'E', which came to be dismissed vide order
dated 08.08.2023 considering provisions of Section 362 of the
CrPC.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned order,
the applicant has preferred present application.
6. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the
Sessions Court has ample power to adjust the amount. Upon
placing reliance on the judgment dated 18.07.2019 rendered
in Vivek Sahni and Ors. vs. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. by
the Punjab & Haryana High Court, learned advocate for the
applicant prays to adjust the said amount.
7. Per contra, learned advocate Mr. Bomi Shethna
appearing for the opponent submits that once the applicant
himself confined and has given an application for extension of
time, now question of modification or deletion of condition 'E'
does not arise.
8. Heard learned advocates for both the sides and perused
the documents on record.
9. It is not in dispute that under Section 148(A) of the NI
Act, the Appellate Court has power while suspending sentence
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1015/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
under Section 389 to impose appropriate condition and
considered the provision of Section 148(A) of the NI Act. In the
present case, the applicant was enlarged on bail vide order
dated 09.06.2023 by imposing Condition No.'E' and ordered to
deposit 20% amount. Thereafter, the applicant has preferred
an application dated 09.08.2023 after two months for
extension of time, which was allowed. Once the application for
extension of time is allowed and time is granted by the learned
Sessions Court, learned Sessions Judge has passed
appropriate order, no interference is required in light of the
decision in the case of Surinder Singh Deswal @ Col. S.S.
Deswal vs. Virender Gandhi & Anr. reported in (2019)2 SCC
341, nothing is required to be decided further in the matter as
he confined himself.
So far as the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court
in the case of Vivek Sahni and Ors (Supra) relied on by the
learned advocate for the applicant in support of his contention
to re-adjust the amount is concerned, reference is required to
be made to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Parasa Raja Manikyala Rao And Anr vs State Of A.P.
reported in AIR 2004 SC 132, wherein it has been observed and
held as under:
"...Each case, more particularly a criminal case depends on
its own facts and a close similarity between one case and
another is not enough to warrant like treatment because a
significant detail may alter the entire aspect. In deciding
such cases, one should avoid the temptation to decide
cases (as said by Cordozo) by matching the colour of one
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1015/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
case against the colour of another. To decide therefore on
which side of the line a case falls, the broad resemblance to
another case is not at all decisive."
In view of the above, the decision in the case of Vivek Sahni
and Ors. (Supra) relied upon by the learned advocate for the
applicant would not be of any help to the applicant.
10. In view of the above, present application being devoid of
merits stands dismissed.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
NABILA
