Gujarat High Court
Owner Of Subham Buildcon - Hathisinh ... vs State Of Gujarat on 20 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24157/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
24157 of 2025
==========================================================
OWNER OF SUBHAM BUILDCON - HATHISINH NAKUM
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
ANAND S TAILOR(9021) 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 Mr. Shriram K. Bhargav appears and
submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the
respondent no.2 - original complainant. He is permitted to file
his appearance. Registry shall accept his 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
14.08.2025 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge and
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lodhika, Rajkot, in Criminal
Case No. 44 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.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24157/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant,
who is personally present before this Court, has produced his
identity proof, which is ordered to be taken on record. The
complainant has also filed an affidavit, which is annexed at
Annexure 'B' to the petition. 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 Mr. Shriram K.
Bhargav 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 14.08.2025 passed by the learned Principal
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/24157/2025 ORDER DATED: 20/11/2025
undefined
Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lodhika, Rajkot,
in Criminal Case No. 44 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 :
"3. I further say and submit that now that the grievance against
the petitioner is over and the matter is amicably settled between
us through intervention of business community relations, friends
and family members, I do not have any objection if the criminal
complaint filed before the Ld. Trial Court is quashed and set-
aside. I further say and submit that since the said complaint has
now resulted into impugned judgment and order of conviction
dated 14.08.2025 passed by Ld. Principal Civil Judge & JMFC,
Lodhika, Rajkot, I have no objection if the present petition is
allowed and the said impugned judgment and order and
consequential proceedings thereon are quashed and set aside."
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/24157/2025 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
14.08.2025 passed by the learned Principal Civil Judge and
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lodhika, Rajkot, in Criminal
Case No. 44 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, Rajkot, 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
