[Cites 6, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Hiteshbhai Vasantray ... vs Bharatbhai Ganshaymbhai Pardhari on 24 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/963/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 963 of 2021
With
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 15 of 2022
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
√
==========================================================
HITESHBHAI VASANTRAY PAREKH(DECEASED) & ANR.
Versus
BHARATBHAI GANSHAYMBHAI PARDHARI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
DECEASED LITIGANT THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS/ REPRESTENTATIVES for the Applicant(s)
MR HARDIK H DAVE(6295) for the Applicant(s) No. 1.1
MR RAJDIPSINH M MAKWANA(13031) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR SIDDHANT J PARASHAR(12693) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 24/04/2026
COMMON JUDGMENT
[1.0] Considering the issue involved in the present applications and
with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective
parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the
applicants and original complainant has been resolved amicably,
present applications are taken up for final disposal forthwith as
alleged offence is bailable and compoundable.
[2.0] By way of present applications under Section 397 read with
Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (For short
"CrPC"), the applicants have prayed for quashing and setting aside the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/963/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2026
undefined
judgment and order dated 17.02.2018 passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Vapin in Criminal Case Nos.2940/2016 and
2192/2016 as well as the order dated 09.12.2021 passed by the
learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Valsad, at Vapi in Criminal
Appeal Nos.80 of 2020 and 79/2020.
[3.0] Learned advocate for the applicants has taken this Court
through the factual matrix arising out of the present applications. At
the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the
issue. It is further submitted that in view of the fact that the dispute is
resolved, present applications deserves consideration.
[4.0] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State
has opposed the present application and submitted that considering
the seriousness of the offence, present application may be rejected.
[5.0] Learned advocate for original complainant has reiterated the
contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicants and also
submitted that the original complainant has filed an affidavit stating
therein that the complainant has settled the dispute with the
applicants and has no objection if the conviction and sentence
recorded by the learned trial Court and upheld by the learned
appellate Court is quashed and set aside in both the cases. It is
therefore submitted that the present applications may be allowed.
[6.0] At the outset, learned advocates for the respective parties
have jointly submitted that matter is settled and now the original
complainant does not want to pursue further the litigation as
complainant and applicants have settled the matter. Upon
instructions, it is submitted by the learned advocate for the
complainant that the applicants have deposited in total Rs.7,50,000/-
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/963/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2026
undefined
towards both the cases and now the dispute between him and
applicants having been resolved, he has requested to direct the
learned Sessions Court, Valsad to disburse the said amount to the
complainant.
[7.0] Considering the fact that the dispute is settled between the
parties and original complainant is satisfied with total Rs.7,50,000/-
deposited by the applicants before the learned appellate Court and as
the offence is compoundable one at any stage under Section 147 of
the NI Act. But, as accused has settled the dispute at belated stage
before this Court, in view of the decision rendered in the case of
Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H, reported in 2010(5) SCC
663, accused is required to be saddled with cost and as the accused
has already made the payment/deposited the impugned amount, in
view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
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 Act, 1958, to the applicants-
accused.
[8.0] Resultantly, present revision applications are allowed. The
judgment and order dated 17.02.2018 passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Vapi in Criminal Case Nos.2940/2016 and
2192/2016 as well as the order dated 09.12.2021 passed by the
learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Valsad, at Vapi in Criminal
Appeal Nos.80 of 2020 and 79/2020 are hereby quashed and set aside
with respect to the applicants - accused subject to deposit of 7.5% of
the of settlement amount before the Gujarat State Legal Services
Authority.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/963/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 24/04/2026
undefined
[8.1] The Nazir, District Court, Valsad is directed to disburse
Rs.7,50,000/- deposited by the applicants - accused before the
learned Sessions Court, Valsad in compliance of the order passed by
the learned appellate Court alongwith interest accrued thereon to
the original complainant, after due and proper verification. On
compliance of the said order, if the applicants are behind the bars,
they shall be released subject to deposit of aforesaid amount of cost,
if their presence is no longer required in any other criminal offence.
[9.0] Present revision applications are allowed qua applicants. Rule is
made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.
Record & Proceedings, if any, be sent back forthwith to the concerned
Court. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Sd/-
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
