Gujarat High Court
Vinakumari Satpal Mahera vs State Of Gujarat on 8 January, 2024
Author: Ilesh J. Vora
Bench: Ilesh J. Vora
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/545/2022 ORDER DATED: 08/01/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 545 of 2022
==========================================================
VINAKUMARI SATPAL MAHERA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KAPIL K ACHARYA(2650) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR N.R. KOYANI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS CHETNA SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 08/01/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. Mr. N.R. Koyani, learned advocate states that he 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. Ms. Chetna Shah, learned
APP and Mr. N.R. Koyani, 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 29.10.2018 passed by learned Additional
Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.28, Ahmedabad in
Criminal Case No.2803168 of 2010 by which the applicant
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/545/2022 ORDER DATED: 08/01/2024
undefined
has been convicted for 2 years SI and also directed to pay
Rs.10,000/- as fine and in default of payment of fine, he
has to undergo further SI for 2 months as well as judgment
and order dated 16.11.2021 passed by Additional Sessions
Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal
Appeal No.649 of 2018.
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 ordered to be taken 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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/545/2022 ORDER DATED: 08/01/2024
undefined
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
result, the application is hereby allowed. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent. The judgment and order
passed by the Courts below i.e. orders dated 29.10.2018
and 16.11.2021 and warrant, if any, 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.7,500/- 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
