Gujarat High Court
Mukeshkumar Natvarlal Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 17 April, 2025
Author: Umesh A. Trivedi
Bench: Umesh A. Trivedi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1326/2016 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO.
1326 of 2016
With
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 96 of 2016
======================================
MUKESHKUMAR NATVARLAL PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
======================================
Appearance:
MS TEJAL A VASHI(2704) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN SHAH, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
======================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
Date : 17/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Both these petitions arise out of the same judgment
and order passed by the learned 5 th Additional Sessions Judge
(Ad hoc), Mehsana dated 29.01.2016 in Criminal Appeal No.25
of 2010 whereby the Appeal preferred by the accused - Patel
Kamleshkumar Jagdishchandra challenging his judgment of
conviction and order of sentence imposed by the learned
Magistrate for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')
dated 01.01.2010 in Criminal Case No.6178 of 2002, which
came to be confirmed and Appeal came to be dismissed
whereas before the learned appellate Court, Mukeshkumar
Natvarlal Patel i.e. original complainant vide application Exh.7
requested action against the original accused under the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and requested to refer the
matter to the High Court as also vide application Exh.59
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1326/2016 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
original complainant requested the Court to inquire from the
appellant before the learned appellate Court and seek written
clarification about the name of advocate, who has drafted the
Appeal memo as memo contained contemptuous averments.
Both these applications, Exhs.7 and 59, while dismissing the
Appeal, came to be rejected by the learned appellate Court.
Aggrieved by the same, original complainant preferred
aforesaid Special Criminal Application No.1326 of 2016
whereas Patel Kamleshkumar Jagdishchandra - original
accused preferred Criminal Revision Application No.96 of 2016.
2. Since both these proceedings arise from the same
judgment and order passed by the learned appellate Court, it
is proposed to be disposed of by this common order.
3. The parties would be referred to hereunder as their
original status before the trial Court as complainant and
accused.
4. The accused - Patel Kamleshkumar Jagdishchandra
was prosecuted for an offence under Section 138 of 'the Act'
by filing Criminal Case No.6178 of 2002 in the Court of learned
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mehsana at the instance of
Patel Mukeshkumar Natvarlal. On conclusion of trial, the
accused came to be convicted for an offence under Section
138 of 'the Act' and ordered to undergo Simple Imprisonment
for a year with fine of Rs.5000/- and in default of payment of
fine he was ordered to undergo three months Simple
Imprisonment. Over and above that, under Section 357 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 accused was directed to pay
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1326/2016 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
compensation equal to the cheque amount i.e. Rs.1,50,000/-
under para 209 of the Criminal Manual vide judgment and
order dated 01.01.2010 rendered in Criminal Case No.6178 of
2002. Being aggrieved by the same, accused preferred
Criminal Appeal No.25 of 2010, which also came to be
dismissed vide judgment and order dated 29.01.2016 by the
learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc), Mehsana.
During pendency of the Appeal, complainant preferred
applications, Exh.7 and 59, as aforesaid, which also came to be
rejected while disposing of the main Appeal. While dismissing
the Appeal, the amount of Rs.1,50,000/-, which is sought to be
deposited by the accused before the Sessions Court was
ordered to be obtained by the complainant on conclusion of
time of preferring further proceedings against order of
appellate Court. However, as recorded in common order dated
04.12.2017 in aforesaid Special Criminal Application as also
Criminal Revision Application, learned Sessions Judge
concerned was directed to invest the amount deposited by the
accused in cumulative Fixed Deposit Receipt in the name of
Registrar of the concerned Court initially for a period of six
months and thereafter it is ordered to be renewed from time to
time.
5. As submitted by the learned advocates for the
parties, the aforesaid amount, is still lying in the District Court
in the Fixed Deposit Receipt. When both the applications were
taken up for hearing, accused as also the complainant have
settled their dispute amicably out of the Court. For that a
compromise deed duly signed by both the parties i.e accused
as also complainant affirmed before notary dated 17.04.2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1326/2016 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
is produced and it is ordered to be taken on record. At the
same time, complainant has also affirmed affidavit before
notary dated 17.04.2025 wherein it is stated that the matter is
settled between the parties for a total amount of Rs.4 lakhs.
He has agreed to accept the amount, which is already
deposited by the accused before the Sessions Court in a
cumulative Fixed Deposit and if as on date any shortfall of Rs.4
lakhs is there, accused has agreed, who is advocate by
profession and present before the Court duly identified by Mr.
Kamlesh Kotai, learned advocate, to make good the shortfall
within a period of four weeks from the amount of Fixed Deposit
Receipt is received by the complainant from the appellate
Court. The complainant has agreed if judgment of conviction
and order of sentence imposed upon the accused is quashed
and set aside, he has no objection.
6. Since the matter is settled between the parties
amicably and complainant, who is also present before the
Court and duly identified by the learned advocate representing
him, has agreed to accept the amount, as aforesaid, and
stated on oath that if judgment of conviction and order of
sentence imposed upon the accused is quashed and set aside
he has no objection, the compromise deed entered into
between the parties is accepted.
7. In view of Sub Section (8) of Section 320 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, judgment of conviction and
order of sentence recorded by the learned Magistrate in
Criminal Case No.6178 of 2002 dated 01.01.2010 is hereby
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/1326/2016 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
quashed and set aside, which is confirmed by the appellate
Court in Criminal Appeal No.25 of 2010 dated 29.01.2016
passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge (Ad hoc),
Mehsana is also hereby quashed and set aside and the
accused is ordered to be acquitted of all the charges levelled
against him. In view thereof fine, if deposited, be refunded
back to the accused.
8. In view of the fact that the complainant has agreed
to accept the cheque amount deposited before the Sessions
Court, which carries interest, concerned Sessions Court is
hereby directed to make payment of the amount deposited by
the accused alongwith interest accrued till date to the
complainant on verifying his identity through cheque or any
other electronic mode into the account of him. The
complainant is hereby directed to immediately inform the
accused about the shortfall, if any, to make good the same as
agreed by the accused before the Court. The accused is
hereby directed to respond to the same, that too, within a
period of four weeks as agreed before the Court failing which
the judgment of conviction and order of sentence shall be
recalled.
9. In view thereof, both the petitions stand disposed of
as allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute to
the aforesaid extent in Special Criminal Application No.1326 of
2016.
(UMESH A. TRIVEDI, J.)
siji
