Gujarat High Court
Dhiraji Balaji Makvana vs State Of Gujarat on 18 June, 2024
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/861/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 861 of 2024
==========================================================
DHIRAJI BALAJI MAKVANA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SONAL J BHAVSAR(7399) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR HARDIK MEHTA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 18/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of Rule on
behalf of the respective respondents.
2. Challenge in this Revision Application is given to
the judgment and order of conviction and sentence
dated 8.12.2021 passed by the learned Additional
JMFC, Prantij in Criminal Case no.954 of 2020,
which was confirmed by the judgment and order
dated 15.11.2022 passed by the learned Sessions
Judge, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar in Criminal
Appeal no.180 of 2022.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/861/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
3. Ms. Sonal Bhavsar, learned advocate for the
applicant submitted that the wife of the accused
has already paid the money to the complainant
since the accused is in jail and the parties have
settled the disputes amicably outside the Court
and that there remains no grievance between them.
4. Learned advocate for respondent no.2 - original
complainant has placed on record the affidavit of
settlement filed by the respondent no.2-original
complainant and stated that the proposed
settlement amount, as agreed between the parties,
has already been paid. The same is taken on
record. Learned advocate seeks permission to file
Vakalatnama. Let Vakalatnama be accepted.
5. Today, Ramesh Amrutbhai Patel-respondent no.2 is
present before this Court and the respondent no.2
has affirmed the contents of the affidavit and is
identified by learned advocate for respondent
no.2. Respondent no.2 has further stated that the
wife of the accused has paid the cheque amount and
has executed the receipt and thus, has made a
prayer to set aside the conviction on the basis of
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/861/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
the settlement.
6. Since the complainant has given consent for
compounding the offence, keeping in mind the
object of Section 147 of the NI Act, which is an
enabling provision which provides for compounding
the offence and may require the consent of the
aggrieved for compounding the offence, however,
the specific provision under Section 147, inserted
by way of amendment towards special law, would
give overriding effect to sub-section (1) of
Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 as has been observed in the case of Damodar
S. Prabhu v. Sayed Baba Lal, AIR 2010 SC 1907.
Accordingly, as the dispute has been resolved and
the entire amount has been paid to the
complainant, in consonance with the object of the
thereof, the matter is considered as compounded.
7. In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and
order passed by the learned Trial Court of
conviction and sentence for the offence punishable
under Section 138 of the NI Act, as affirmed by
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/861/2024 ORDER DATED: 18/06/2024
undefined
the learned Appellate Court, are quashed and set
aside. The applicant stands acquitted. The
applicant be released from jail forthwith.
8. Accordingly, the present application is allowed in
the above terms. Rule is made absolute to the
aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Maulik
