Gujarat High Court
Divyarajsinh Upendrasinh Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 16 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12609/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT
QUASHING) NO. 12609 of 2025
============================================
DIVYARAJSINH UPENDRASINH RATHOD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
============================================
Appearance:
MR SHIVRAJSINGH B RATHORE(10291) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 16/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1) Rule. Learned Advocates waives service of rule for the respective
respondents.
2) By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India, read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, the petitioner has sought quashing of the judgment and
order dated 20.12.2022, passed by the learned 9 th Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Special Negotiable Court, Jamnagar in Criminal
Case No.3148 of 2020, by which the petitioner has been convicted
and ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six
months and to pay the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- towards
compensation to the complainant and in default of payment of the
said amount, the petitioner to undergo further simple imprisonment
for a period of 30 days and as the petitioner was not present when
the judgment was pronounced, the learned Magistrate issued
warrant against the petitioner.
3) It appears that the settlement has been arrived at between the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12609/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
complainant and present petitioner and the entire cheque amount
has been paid to the respondent complainant, which has been
confirmed by the complainant by Affidavit at Annexure B, which is
placed on record. The complainant do not wish to proceed further
and is willing to compound the offence. Accordingly, the petitioner
by filing this petition, seeks compounding of the offence under
Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
4) The petitioner also submits that the petitioner is willing to deposit
costs as directed by the Supreme Court in case of Damodar S.
Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H., reported in (2010) 5 SCC 633,
with the Legal Service Authority. The complainant in present in the
Court and affirms the factum of settlement as well as filing of
affidavit by him.
5) In case of Kripalsingh Pratapsingh Vs. Salvinder Kaur
Hardisingh Lohana reported in (2004)2 GLH 544, the
Coordinate Bench of this Court after considering various decisions
of the Apex Court, took a view that it would be permissible for the
High Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of
the Code / Section 528 of the BNSS, to record the settlement
arrived at between the parties, merely alternate remedy available is
not a ground to refuse to compromise as offence is bailable and
compoundable one.
6) Thus, taking into account the fact of settlement, the compounding
of the offence is hereby permitted.
7) As a result, the petition is allowed. The judgment and order dated
20.12.2022, passed by the learned 9 th Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Special Negotiable Court, Jamnagar in Criminal Case
No.3148 of 2020, and warrant issued by it are hereby quashed and
set aside. The petitioner is acquitted of the offences under the
provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner is
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/12609/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
directed to deposit 15% of the cheque amount i.e. Rs.45,000/-
with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority within a period of
one week from the date of receipt of this order. Rule is made
absolute to aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT
