[Cites 5, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Chiragsingh Mansukhsingh Rajput vs State Of Gujarat on 20 May, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/6931/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/05/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (FOR CONSENT QUASHING) NO.
6931 of 2026
==========================================================
CHIRAGSINGH MANSUKHSINGH RAJPUT
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. KURVEN K DESAI(7786) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL K. VYAS
Date : 20/05/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Neel Vasant appears and submits
that Mr. Yuvraj G. Thakore has instructions to appear on behalf
of the respondent no.2 - complainant. He is permitted to file
his appearance. Registry shall accept his vakalatnama.
2. By way of preferring the present application under
Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023,
the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of
this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the judgment and
order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the learned 20 th Additional
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad City, in Criminal Case
No.180410 of 2024, for the offence punishable under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well as all other
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/6931/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/05/2026
undefined
consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.
3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant,
who is personally present before this Court, has produced his
identity proof as well as the affidavit, which are ordered to be
taken on record. In the said affidavit, the complainant has
categorically stated that he has received his dues of
Rs.3,00,000/- and the dispute has been amicably resolved with
the applicant. The complainant has further stated that he has
no grievance or ill-will against the applicant.
4. Considering the issue involved in the present application
as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been
amicably resolved with the applicant, with the consent of
learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the
present application is taken up for final disposal.
5. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Rohan Raval
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Mr. Neel Vasant
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the
respondent no.2 - complainant.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/6931/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/05/2026
undefined
6. The complainant, who is personally present before this
Court, has categorically stated that the dispute has been
amicably resolved with the applicant and he has no objection if
the application is allowed and the impugned judgment and
order is quashed and set-aside.
7. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the
complainant - Ruchit Charulbhai Shah, read thus :
"2. That pursuant to the order being passed, settlement has been arrived
Petitioner and the undersigned a between the Original-Complainant and
the Petitioner has already paid a Demand Draft of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees
Three Lacs Only) dated 06.05.2026. Annexed herewith and marked as
Annexure RR is the copy of the said Demand Draft.
3. That the said Demand Draft is accepted by the undersigned - Original
Complainant and thus now the Original Complainant does not wish to
proceed with the matter and has no objection if the Conviction order
passed by the Ld. 20th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, N. I Act Court
No. 30 Ahmedabad is quashed and set aside.
4. That the said affidavit is filed after an amicable settlement has been
arrived at between me and the accused (Petitioner) and since the
offences alleged against are personal in nature not affecting any interest
of the State Government, I have agreed to compromise the entire dispute
including the impugned complaint filed by me and the proceedings that
have arisen pursuant to the filing of the complaint.
5. I state and submit that this affidavit is filed without any pressure,
coercion or force and I am bound to respect the same and therefore, I
accord my consent to this Hon'ble Court to quash the Conviction order
passed and all other consequential proceedings, against the petitioner
original accused, which would serve the purpose of justice."
8. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/6931/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/05/2026
undefined
further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned
judgment and order would be a futile exercise and the
same would amount to abuse of process of law.
9. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties as well as considering the facts and
circumstances arising out of the present application and taking
into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2012) 10
SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab,
reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central
Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2009) 1
GLH 31, Manoj Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in
(2009) 1 GLH 190, and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State
of Punjab & Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as
well as State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR
1992 SC 604, it appears that continuing further with the
criminal proceedings pursuant to the impugned judgment and
order would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to
abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice,
the impugned judgment and order as well as all other
consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/6931/2026 ORDER DATED: 20/05/2026
undefined
required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of the powers
conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023.
10. In the result, the application is allowed. The judgment
and order dated 19.02.2026 passed by the learned 20 th
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad City, in
Criminal Case No.180410 of 2024, for the offence punishable
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well
as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto
are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside qua the
present applicant.
11. In view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the
case of Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Borcar [2025 INSC
1158], the applicant is directed to deposit 7.5 % of the cheque
amount, by way of costs, with the District Legal Service
Authority, Ahmedabad, within a period of 2 weeks from the
date of this order.
12. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(VIMAL K. VYAS, J)
DEEPAK GEHLOT
