Gujarat High Court
Jayesh Jerambhai Jogi vs State Of Gujarat on 19 June, 2024
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1230/2023 ORDER DATED: 19/06/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 1230 of 2023
================================================================
JAYESH JERAMBHAI JOGI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. NAGARBHAI G PARMAR(9816) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK MEHTA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR SMIT P VAGHELA for the Respondent(s) No.2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 19/06/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives
service of Rule on behalf of the respondent - State
and learned Advocate Mr. Smit P. Vaghela waives
service of Rule on behalf of the respondent no.2.
2. By way of this application, challenge is given to the
concurrent findings of conviction and sentence under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
(hereinafter referred to in short as 'the N.I. Act').
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1230/2023 ORDER DATED: 19/06/2024
undefined
3. Learned Advocate for the applicant Mr. Nagarbhai G.
Parmar submitted that during the pendency of the
proceedings, the parties have settled the disputes
amicably outside the Court, and that there remains
no grievance between them.
4. The respondent No.2 - Bhadresh Atulbhai Ansari -
the original complainant is present before the Court
and is identified by learned advocate Mr. Smit P.
Vaghela. Learned Advocate Mr. Smit P. Vaghela seeks
permission to file the Vakalatnama. Registry to accept
the same.
5. Learned Advocate for the respondent no.2-original
complainant Mr. Smit P. Vaghela states that the
complainant has received the cheque amount, i.e.
Rs.5,50,000/- and as agreed between the parties, the
complainant does not want to pursue the matter now
in view of amicable settlement and has given consent
for compounding the offence. The complainant also
filed an affidavit to that effect dated 19.06.2024,
which is ordered to be taken on record.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1230/2023 ORDER DATED: 19/06/2024
undefined
5. Since the above amount has been received by the
complainant and the complainant has given consent
for compounding the offence, keeping in mind the
object of Section 147 of the N.I. 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 of the N.I. Act,
inserted by way of amendment towards special law,
would give overriding effect to sub-section (1) of
Section 320 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) 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 cheque
amount has been paid to the complainant, in
consonance with the object of the N.I. Act and the
provisions under Section 147 thereof, the matter is
considered as compounded.
6. 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 the learned
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/1230/2023 ORDER DATED: 19/06/2024
undefined
Appellate Court, are quashed and set aside. The
applicant stands acquitted.
7. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed
of in the above terms. Rule is made absolute to the
aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J)
CAROLINE
