Gujarat High Court
Priti Sunil Makhija vs State Of Gujarat on 16 September, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/9545/2018 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 9545 of 2018
==========================================================
PRITI SUNIL MAKHIJA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HIREN P VYAS(2269) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS SEJAL H VYAS(3211) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MITA S PANCHAL(530) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. SOAHAM JOSHI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 16/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner, learned advocate for
the respondent No.2, and the learned APP appearing for the
respondent-State.
2. The present petition is instituted by the petitioner, Mrs. Priti
Sunil Makhija, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, seeking quashment of Criminal Case No. 5417 of
2017 instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881, qua her, on the premise that though she was a joint account
holder along with her husband, she is not the signatory to the cheque
in question.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has invited the
attention of this Court to the judgment rendered by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court in Harshad Manubhai Malavaiya v. State of
Gujarat in Criminal Misc. Application No.19938 of 2016, and has
contended that the issue is no longer res integra, being squarely
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/9545/2018 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
covered by the said precedent.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has
submitted that the trial as against the co-accused, namely, the
husband of the petitioner, is at its concluding stage.
5. Learned APP for the State has, however, left the matter to the
discretion of this Court, requesting the Court to pass an appropriate
order in the facts and circumstances of the case.
6. I have bestowed my anxious consideration to the rival
submissions and have carefully perused the material available on
record. It is not in controversy that the cheque in question was issued
by Sunil Makhija, husband of the petitioner, from a joint account
maintained in their names. It is equally incontrovertible that the
petitioner herein is not the signatory to the said cheque. The sole
basis for her arraignment as an accused appears to be that she is a
joint account holder.
7. The very issue stands elaborately considered and
authoritatively pronounced upon by the Coordinate Bench of this
Court in Harshad Manubhai Malavaiya (supra), wherein it was
held that mere status as a joint account holder, in the absence of
being a signatory to the cheque, cannot furnish a valid foundation for
fastening criminal liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act. The ratio therein applies on all fours to the facts of
the case at hand.
8. In view of the aforesaid enunciation, and adopting the
reasoning assigned by the Coordinate Bench, this Court is persuaded
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/9545/2018 ORDER DATED: 16/09/2025
undefined
to hold that the continuance of the proceedings against the present
petitioner would be wholly unwarranted, nay, an abuse of the
process of law. Ergo, the petition deserves to be allowed.
9. Accordingly, the proceedings of Criminal Case No.5417 of
2017 are hereby quashed and set aside qua the petitioner - Smt.
Priti Sunil Makhija. It is, however, clarified that this Court has not
examined the merits of the case insofar as the other accused, namely,
Sunil Makhija, is concerned, and the quashment ordered herein shall
not have any bearing or influence on the continuation of proceedings
against him.
10. Petition stands ALLOWED in the aforesaid terms. Rule made
absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI,J)
MANISH MISHRA
