Gujarat High Court
Renukaben Kirisinh Chavada vs State Of Gujarat on 23 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7675/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO. 7675
of 2025
==========================================================
RENUKABEN KIRISINH CHAVADA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ANVESH V VYAS(5654) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SOHAM JOSHI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 23/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Sagar Pandya submits that he has
got instructions to appear on behalf of respondent - original
complainant. He is permitted to file his Vakalatnama in the
Registry. Registry to accept the same.
2. By way of preferring present petition, the petitioner seeks
to invoke extra-ordinary and inherent jurisdiction of this Court
under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution read with Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for
quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction
and sentence dated 26.3.2025 passed by learned 2nd Additional
JMFC, Mehsana in Criminal Case No.819 of 2025 and
terminating all the proceedings arising thereunder qua the
petitioner.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7675/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025
undefined
3. Rule. Learned advocates for the respective respondents
waive service.
4. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that total
cheque amount has been paid to the complainant and the
complainant has no grievance now. Respondent - original
complainant since is the company, he has authorized Mr.
Vahidali Pathan, who is present in the Court and is identified by
learned advocate Mr. Sagar Pandya. The learned advocate for
the respondent - original complainant states that the
complainant has received the total cheque amount and the
complainant does not want to pursue the matter now in view of
amicable settlement and has given consent for compounding the
offence. The authorization letter to that effect, which is placed on
record.
5. Now, since matter is settled between the parties and due
amount is paid to respondent - complainant and in view of the
fact that offence under the N.I Act is now made compoundable, it
is to be encouraged. Considering the affidavit, it is clear that the
compounding is genuine, and therefore, the judgment and order
of conviction and sentence dated 26.3.2025 passed by learned
2nd Additional JMFC, Mehsana in Criminal Case No.819 of 2025
is hereby quashed and set aside.
6. In view of sub-section (8) of Section 320 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner is acquitted of the
charge leveled against him.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/7675/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025
undefined
7. Since the compounding between the parties is arrived at
this stage before this Court, a cost in required to be imposed on
the petitioner in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal
reported in AIR 2010 SC 1907. As per the said decision, the
petitioner is required to deposit Rs.5000/-. Learned advocate of
the petitioner has tendered an undertaking of the petitioner
wherein he has shown his willingness to deposit Rs.5000/-.
8. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed subject to
deposit of Rs.5000/- with the High Court Legal Services
Committee within a period of one week from today, failing which,
Registry to relist the matter for appropriate order. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
SHEKHAR P. BARVE
