Gujarat High Court
Bhupendra Kalidas Parmar vs State Of Gujarat on 5 May, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/214/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 214 of 2025
==========================================================
BHUPENDRA KALIDAS PARMAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. AAMIR S PATHAN(7142) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 05/05/2025
ORAL ORDER
[1.0] RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as
learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of
notice of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.
[2.0] Considering the issue involved in the present 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 original complainant has been
resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal
forthwith as alleged offence is bailable and compoundable.
1. By way of this application under Section 397 (section 438
of BNSS) read with Section 401 (section 442 of BNSS) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "CrPC"), the
applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the
judgment and order dated 02.04.2019 passed by the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara, in Criminal Case
No.10394/2013, whereby the Trial Court has been pleased to
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/214/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
held the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under
Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to undergo SI of one year
and also directed to pay Fine of Rs.10,000/- to the original
complainant, as well as order dated 17.01.2025 by which
learned Sessions Judge, Vadodara, dismissed Criminal Appeal
No.88/2019 and confirmed the judgment and order of conviction
of learned trial Court. Hence, this Revision Application is filed.
[4.0] Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court
through the factual matrix arising out of the present application.
At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably
resolved the issue. It is further submitted that in view of the fact
that the dispute is resolved, present application deserves
consideration.
[5.0] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
State has opposed the present application and submitted that
considering the seriousness of the offence, present application
may be rejected.
[6.0] Mr. Darshil Prajapati, learned advocate appearing for the
Original Complainant has received instructions to appear on
behalf of the original-complainant. He is permitted to file his
appearance before the Registry.
[6.1] Learned advocate for original complainant has reiterated
the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant.
The learned advocate for original complainant also relied upon
the affidavit filed by the original complainant - Bhupendra
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/214/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
Chandrasinh Solanki - Original Complainant who is also
personally present in person before the Court and is identified by
learned advocate for the original complainant. The affidavit
sworn by the original complainant is taken on record. On inquiry
made by the Court, original complainant has declared before this
Court that the dispute between the applicant and the original
complainant is resolved and therefore, now the grievance stands
redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present application
may be allowed.
[7.0] At the outset, learned advocates for the respective parties
have jointly submitted that matter is settled and now the original
complainant does not wants to pursue for the further litigation
as complainant and applicant have settled the matter and in this
regard, affidavit of original complainant has been placed, which
is taken on record. The contents of the affidavit is also admitted
by the original complainant. Even complainant has remained
present before this Court and stated that he has no objection if
the conviction recorded by the learned Trial Court as well as
Appellate Court is set aside.
[8.0] Considering the fact that the dispute is settled between
the parties and the applicant has paid the cheque amount i.e.
Rs.2,50,000/- to the complainant and said fact has been
confirmed by the complainant as offence is compoundable one at
any stage under Section 147 of the NI Act. But, as accused has
settled the dispute at belated stage before this Court, in view of
the decision rendered in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu Vs.
Sayed Babalal H, reported in 2010(5) SCC 663, accused is
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/214/2025 ORDER DATED: 05/05/2025
undefined
required to be saddled with cost.
[9.0] Resultantly, this revision application is allowed. The
order dated 02.04.2019 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Vadodara, in Criminal Case No.10394/2013, as well
as order dated 17.01.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge,
Vadodara, in Criminal Appeal No.88/2019 are hereby quashed
and set aside with respect to the applicant, subject to deposit of
15% of the amount of cheque i.e. Rs.37,500/- out of the total
cheque amount of Rs.2,50,000/- before the Gujarat State Legal
Services Authority.
[10.0] On compliance of the said order, if the applicant is
behind the bar, he shall be released subject to deposit of
aforesaid amount of cost, if his presence is no longer required in
any other criminal offence.
[11.0] The present application is allowed qua applicant. Rule is
made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ALI
