Gujarat High Court
Kishorkumar Shantumal Sindhi vs State Of Gujarat on 11 June, 2024
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 10369 of 2024
=====================================================
KISHORKUMAR SHANTUMAL SINDHI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=====================================================
Appearance:
MS RAKSHA S KHATED(12987) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS MAITHILI D MEHTA ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for
the Respondent(s) No. 1
=====================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 11/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this application, the applicant has
prayed for the following reliefs :-
"A) Your Lordships may be pleased
admit/allow this petition;
B) Your Lordships may be pleased to
suspend the judgment and order dated
14.04.2023 passed by Ld. 9th Additional
Judicial Magistrate Court, Mehsana being
Criminal case no. 8473 of 2021 which is at
Annexure-A and Common Judgment and order
dated 29.03.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal
No.155 of 2023 & Criminal Revision
Application No.39 of 2023 passed by the
Ld. 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana
which is at Annexure-B pending hearing and
final disposal of this petition;
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
C) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash
and set aside the judgment and order dated
15.04.2023 passed by Ld. 9th Additional
Judicial Magistrate Court, Mehsana being
Criminal case no. 8473 of 2021 which is at
Annexure-A and Common Judgment and order
dated 29.03.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal
No.155 of 2023 & Criminal Revision
Application No.39 of 2023 passed by the
Ld. 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana
which is at Annexure-B and Your Lordships
may be pleased to give benefit under
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act by compounding the offence.
D) Your Lordships may be pleased pass any
such other and/or further orders as deems
fit to this Hon'ble Court in the interest
of justice."
2. Heard learned advocate Ms. Raksha S. Khated
appearing for the applicant, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor Ms. Maithili D. Mehta
appearing for the respondent No.1 - State and
learned advocate Ms. Anushree Pandey who has
received instructions to appear on behalf of the
respondent No.2 - Original Complainant. Learned
advocate Ms. Anushree Pandey is permitted to
file her appearance forthwith.
3. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as
well as learned advocate appearing for the
Complainant waive service of Rule on behalf of
the respective respondents.
4. Considering the issue involved in the present
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
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 respondent No.2 has
been resolved amicably, this application is
taken up for final disposal forthwith.
5. The dispute is in respect of three different
cheques which were dishonored total amounting to
Rs.2,50,000/- and as the proceedings being
Criminal Case No.8473 of 2021 was initiated by
the respondent No.2 which were decided vide
order dated 15.4.2023 by the learned 9th
Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Mehsana holding the petitioner guilty for an
offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act thereby directing him
to pay the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and with
simple imprisonment of six months and in case of
default to pay the amount, thirty days simple
imprisonment. The petitioner challenged the said
order passed in Criminal Case No. 8473 of 2021
on 15.4.2023 by way of Appeal No. 155 of 2023 as
well as Criminal Revision Application No.39 of
2023 which was also rejected by learned 2nd
Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana vide order
dated 29.3.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.
155 of 2023. After having failed before both the
Courts, the petitioner has preferred this
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
petition seeking quashing of the order on the
ground that the dispute is settled between the
parties and hence, the impugned judgment passed
by both the Trial Court as well as Appellate
Court are required to be quashed and set aside.
6. Heard learned advocate Ms. Raksha Khated for the
petitioner and learned advocate Ms. Pandey for
respondent No.2. Learned advocate Ms. Pandey
draws attention of this Court to the affidavit
filed by the original complainant - respondent
No.2 herein viz. Yogeshkumar Ashokkumar Visnani
and states that the dispute between the parties
is settled and hence, both the impugned orders
in this petition may be quashed as the
respondent No.2 does not have any objection if
both the impugned judgment and orders are
quashed.
7. Original complainant - Yogeshkumar Ashokkumar
Visnani is present before this Court and
identified by learned advocate Ms. Anushree
Pandey. Upon inquiry from the Court Mr. Visnanin
states in line with what is stated in the
affidavit and specifically states that he does
not have any objection if both the impugned
judgments are quashed.
8. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken
this Court through the factual matrix arising
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
out of the present application. At the outset,
it is submitted that the parties have amicably
resolved the issue and therefore, any further
continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the
impugned FIR as well as any further proceedings
arising therefrom would create hardship to the
applicant. It is submitted that respondent No.2
has filed an affidavit in these proceedings and
has declared that the dispute between the
applicant and respondent No.2 is resolved due to
intervention of trusted persons of the society.
It is further submitted that in view of the fact
that the dispute is resolved, the trial would be
futile and any further continuance of the
proceedings would amount to abuse of process of
law. It is therefore submitted that this Court
may exercise its inherent powers conferred under
Section 482 of the Code and allow the
application as prayed for.
9. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing
for the State has opposed the present
application and submitted that considering the
seriousness of the offence, the complaint in
question may not be quashed and the present
application may be rejected.
10. Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has
reiterated the contentions raised by the learned
advocate for the applicant. The learned advocate
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
for respondent No.2 also relied upon the
affidavit filed by respondent No.2 - Yogeshkumar
Ashokkumar Visnani dated 17.5.2024. Respondent
No.2 is present in person before the Court and
is identified by learned advocate for respondent
No.2. On inquiry made by the Court, respondent
No.2 has declared before this Court that the
dispute between the applicant and respondent
No.2 is resolved due to intervention of trusted
persons of the society and therefore, now the
grievance stands redressed. It is therefore
submitted that the present application may be
allowed.
11. Having heard the learned advocates
appearing for the respective parties,
considering the facts and circumstances arising
out of the present application as well as taking
into consideration the decisions rendered by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh
Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012)
10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of
Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil
Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation &
Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma
Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190
and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab &
Anr. reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC), it
appears that further continuation of criminal
proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
against the applicant would be unnecessary
harassment to the applicant. I have also
considered the latest decision of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @
Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v.
State of Gujarat, Criminal Appeal No.1723 of
2017 dated 4.10.2017 and the guidelines issued
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said
decision, particularly paragraph 15.
Considering the nature of disputes between the
parties which are all private in nature, I am of
the opinion that the matter requires
consideration. It appears that the trial would
be futile and further continuance of the
proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would
amount to abuse of process of law and hence, to
secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR is
required to be quashed and set aside in exercise
of powers conferred under Section 482 of the
Code.
12. Resultantly, this application is allowed
and both the impugned judgment and order dated
15.4.2023 passed by the learned 9th Additional
Judicial Magistrate, Mehsana being Criminal Case
No.8473 of 2021 and common judgment and order
dated 29.3.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal No.155
of 2023 and Criminal Revision Application No.39
of 2023 passed by the learned 2nd Additional
Sessions Judge, Mehsana is hereby quashed and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/10369/2024 ORDER DATED: 11/06/2024
undefined
set aside qua the present applicant.
Accordingly, Rule is made absolute. Direct
service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
Pallavi
