[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Sangramsinh Bhathiji Dunkh vs State Of Gujarat on 20 March, 2026
Author: Gita Gopi
Bench: Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/12/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 12 of 2026
================================================================
SANGRAMSINH BHATHIJI DUNKH
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SATYAJIT S SONAGARA(12218) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. HARISINGH SODHA(17638) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JYOTI BHATT, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR HARSHAL PATEL for the Complainant / Respondent (s) No.2
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 20/03/2026
ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Harshal S. Patel states that he appears
for the complainant. Let his Vakalatnama be accepted.
2. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of Rule on behalf of
the respective respondents.
3. Challenge in this Revision Application is given to the judgment
and order of conviction and sentence dated 11.03.2025
passed by the learned 2nd Additional Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Deesa, District Banaskantha in Criminal Case No.3328
of 2023, which was confirmed by the judgment and order
dated 19.12.2025 passed by the learned 7 th Additional
Sessions Judge, Deesa, District Banaskantha in Criminal
Appeal No.128 of 2025.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/12/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2026
undefined
4. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that during the
pendency of the proceedings, parties have settled the
disputes amicably outside the Court and that there remains no
grievance between them.
5. Learned advocate for respondent no.2 - original complainant
has placed on record the affidavit of settlement filed by the
respondent no.2-original complainant and stated that the
complainant has received the amount as agreed between the
parties and the complainant does not want to pursue the
matter now in view of amicable settlement and has given
consent for compounding the offence. The same is taken on
record. Today, respondent no.2 is present before this Court
and the respondent no.2 has affirmed the contents of the
affidavit and is identified by learned advocate for respondent
no.2.
6. Since the complainant has given consent for compounding the
offence, keeping in mind the object of Section 147 of the NI
Act, which is an enabling provision which provides for
compounding the offence and may require the consent of the
aggrieved for compounding the offence, however, the specific
provision under Section 147, inserted by way of amendment
towards special law, would give overriding effect to sub-
section (1) of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 as has been observed in the case of Damodar S.
Prabhu v. Sayed Baba Lal, AIR 2010 SC 1907.
Accordingly, as the dispute has been resolved and the amount
has been paid to the complainant, in consonance with the
object of the N.I. Act and the provisions under Section 147
thereof, the matter is considered as compounded.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/12/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2026
undefined
7. In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order
passed by the learned Trial Court of conviction and sentence
for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, as
affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, are quashed and set
aside. The applicant stands acquitted.
8. Accordingly, the present application is allowed in the above
terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
service is permitted.
Sd/-
(GITA GOPI, J)
CAROLINE / DB # 83
