Gujarat High Court
Mahendrabhai Parshottambhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 20 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19941/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
19941 of 2025
==========================================================
MAHENDRABHAI PARSHOTTAMBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR M N SHAIKH(11323) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR MEHULKUMAR G SHRIMALI(13163) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 20/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Ms. Haniben H. Joshi appears and
submits that she has instructions to appear on behalf of the
respondent no.2 - original complainant. She is permitted to file
his appearance. Registry shall accept her vakalatnama.
2. By way of preferring the present application under Section
528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the
applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this
Court, praying to quash and set-aside the order dated
04.11.2024 passed by the learned 4th Additional Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Mahesana, in Criminal Case No. 2992 of
2022, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as well as all other
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19941/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.
3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant,
who is personally present before this Court, has produced his
identity proof as well as an affidavit, which are ordered to be
taken on record. In the said affidavit, the complainant has
categorically stated that he has no grievance against the
applicant as he has received his dues, and the dispute has been
amicably resolved and there is no ill-will or any grievance
amongst them.
4. Considering the issue involved in the present application
as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been
amicably resolved between the parties, with the consent of the
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the
present application is taken up for final disposal.
5. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Manan
Maheta waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Ms. Haniben H.
Joshi waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.2 - complainant.
6. The complainant, who is personally present in the Court,
has categorically stated before this Court that he has no
objection if the application is allowed and the order of
conviction dated 04.11.2024 passed by the learned 4 th
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19941/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahesana, in
Criminal Case No. 2992 of 2022, is quashed and set-aside.
7. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue
further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned order of
conviction would be a futile exercise and the same would
amount to abuse of process of law.
8. The relevant paragraph of the affidavit reads thus :
"5. The complainant submits that the matter has been settled
between the parties at post conviction stage and further
complainant states that the disputed amount i.e. Rs. 3,00,000/-
has been received by him.
6. In the facts and circumstances as narrated above, I my free
will, wish and desire stating on oath that I do not wish to
prosecute the criminal proceedings with the petitioner as the
dispute and differences between us have been amicably settled
and resolved peacefully. I state that the impugned order be
quashed and set aside in the interest of justice."
9. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties as well as considering the facts and
circumstances arising out of the present application and taking
into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2012) 10
SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, reported
in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation & Another, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 31, Manoj
Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 190,
and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab &
Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as well as State
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/19941/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it
appears that continuing further with the proceedings pursuant
to the impugned order of conviction would be a futile exercise
and the same would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence,
to secure the ends of justice, the impugned conviction and all
other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are
required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of the powers
conferred 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
10. In the result, the application is allowed. The order dated
04.11.2024 passed by the learned 4th Additional Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Mahesana, in Criminal Case No. 2992 of
2022, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, as well as all other
consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby
ordered to be quashed and set-aside qua the applicant.
11. In view of the ratio laid down in the judgment in the case
of Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Borcar and Another [2025
INSC 1158], the applicant is directed to deposit 7.5% of the
cheque amount, by way of costs with the District Legal Service
Authority, Mahesana, within a period of two weeks from the
date of this order.
12. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
AMAR SINGH
