Gujarat High Court
Rajendrakumar Bhanbhai Vank vs State Of Gujarat on 26 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23183/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
FIR/ORDER) NO. 23183 of 2025
==========================================================
RAJENDRAKUMAR BHANBHAI VANK
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.SHATRUGHN S SONI(17589) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. MANAN MAHETA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 26/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Sandip A. Kapadia appears and
submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the
respondent no.2 - 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 judgment and order
dated 29.04.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Bhesan, District Junagadh, in Criminal Case No. 60
of 2022, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act as well as all other consequential
proceedings arising pursuant thereto.
3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23183/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/11/2025
undefined
who is personally present before this Court, has produced his
identity proof as well as submitted 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 Mr. Sandip A.
Kapadia 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 judgment and
order of conviction and sentence dated 29.04.2025 passed by
the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhesan, District
Junagadh, in Criminal Case No. 60 of 2022, is quashed and set-
aside.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.MA/23183/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/11/2025
undefined
7. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue
further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned
judgment and order of conviction and sentence would be a futile
exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law.
8. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit reads thus :
"3. I further state on oath and submit that, the dispute between
the present applicant and deponent herein is sorted out and
resolved and as such the matter is now amicably settled between
the parties, now there is no heart-burning / dispute whatsoever
in the said regard, the undersigned has no objection if this
Hon'ble Court exercises discretion in favour of the present
petitioner.
4. I further that there remains no grievance between the
deponent and the present petitioners for the alleged incident that
has occurred and I no longer wish to prosecute the petitioners
any further for the alleged incident and I voluntarily give my
consent and without any force or coercion on me for the
quashing of the said order dated 29.04.2025."
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/23183/2025 ORDER DATED: 26/11/2025
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 judgment and
order of conviction and sentence dated 29.04.2025 passed by
the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bhesan, District
Junagadh, in Criminal Case No. 60 of 2022, for the offences
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act, 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, Junagadh, 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
