[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Gunvantbhai Shantilal Shah vs State Of Gujarat on 22 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/632/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 632 of 2013
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
GUNVANTBHAI SHANTILAL SHAH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR RJ GOSWAMI(1102) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR C P CHANIYARA(6836) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 22/04/2026
JUDGMENT
1. By way of the present Revision Application under Sections
397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the
applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the
judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated
20.01.2003 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Keshod in Criminal Case No. 923 of 1997, whereby the
trial Court was pleased to hold the applicant guilty for the
offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as "the NI Act" for short)
and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for six
months, along with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, and in default, to
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/632/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026
undefined
undergo further simple imprisonment for 15 days. The said order
was assailed by filing Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 2003, wherein,
vide judgment and order dated 08.10.2013 passed by the
learned Additional Sessions Court, Junagadh, the appeal came
to be dismissed and the order of conviction was confirmed and
upheld. Hence, the present Revision Application has been filed
by the applicant-accused.
2. Learned Advocate for the applicant has submitted that
during the pendency of the present revision application the
applicant has deposited the cheque amount. In view of above
once the amount being deposited and as the offence under
Section 138 of the NI Act is quasi-criminal in character and is
compoundable and punishment under the NI Act is not a means
of seeking retribution but is more a means to ensure payment of
money and to promote credibility of cheques as a trustworthy
substitute for cash payment. In absence of any perversity and no
ground is found to upset the concurrent findings of the learned
trial Court and Appellate Court and it is not open for Revisional
Court to re-analyse and re-interpret the evidence in revisional
jurisdiction. No case is made out to interfere with the reasons
assigned by both the Courts.
3. At the same time this Court has taken into consideration
the object of the Act as accused made payment and complainant
has received the same, hence, in view of judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court Sanjabij Tari Vs Kishore S. Borcar, Neutral
Citation 2025 INSC 1158, maintaining the conviction this Court
is inclined to extend the benefit under the Probation of Offenders
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/632/2013 JUDGMENT DATED: 22/04/2026
undefined
Act, 1958, to the applicant-accused.
4. Accordingly, the applicant - accused is directed to be
released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the
Probation of Offenders Act, upon execution of probation bond in
sum of Rs.20,000/-, with one surety of like amount for a period
of six months.
5. It is hereby further directed that the applicant - accused
shall receive the sentence as and when called upon till the said
period and the applicant shall maintain peace during above
mentioned period of six months.
6. The above mentioned bond under Section 4 of the
Probation of Offenders Act, be submitted before the learned trial
Court within 15 days of passing of this judgment.
7. Accordingly, present revision application is disposed of.
Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned
Court forthwith.
8. The Registry is directed to release the deposited amount in
favour of the legal heirs of the complainant after proper and due
verification.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ALI
