R/CR.RA/93/2011 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 93 of 2011 ========================================================== DAYALBHAI B PATEL - PROP. M/S.DELTA RUBBER & PLASTIC PRODUCT Versus AHMEDABAD MERCENTILE CO-OP BANK LTD - ODHAV BRANCH & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MR UDAY R BHATT(192) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR PARTHIV A BHATT(5331) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MS MONALI BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 08/04/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. By way of this application, the applicant has sought the following relief: “(b) call for the records and proceedings of Criminal Appeal No. 196 of 2010 before the Ahmedabad City Sessions Court and judgment exhibit 13 dated 7.2.2011 passed by Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad and of Criminal Case No. 1345 of 2008 (which was earlier numbered as Criminal Case 518 of 1998) before the Metropolitan Magistrate's Court, Ahmedabad and also the Negotiable Instrument Act Court No.1 Ahmedabad and judgment exhibit 33 dated 29.4.2010 passed by Hon'ble Judge Metropolitan Magistrate and Negotiable Instruments Act, Court No.1 Ahmedabad and examine the correctness, legality, propriety and validity of the judgments of the learned courts below including their findings and sentences passed against the petitioner and quash and set aside the judgments of the learned courts below and quashed the original complaint against the petitioner filed by the respondent and acquit the petitioner of all charges and also order refund of the amount of Rs. 10,000/- deposited before the Learned Appellate Court and pass such other and further and other orders deemed fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. Page 1 of 3 R/CR.RA/93/2011 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2026 3. Mr. P.A. Bhatt, learned advocate appearing for respondent No.1-Bank, has submitted that he has addressed a letter to the complainant-Bank; however, till date, the Bank has neither replied nor contacted him and, therefore, he is unable to assist the Court. 4. The Coordinate Bench of this Court on 17.09.2012 passed the following order: “Shri Uday Bhatt, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant has stated at the Bar that apropos his request to permit the applicant to compound the offence on deposit of the entire cheque amount and on deposit of 15% cheque amount in the name of Gujarat State Legal Services Authority (which was agreeable to learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original complainant). The applicant has already deposited the entire cheque amount with the learned Appellate Court as well as before this Court and has also brought the 15% of the cheque amount so as to enable the applicant to compound the offence. Shri Parthiv Bhatt, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 original complainant has stated at the Bar that as such the Board of the Bank is required to take final decision on the aforesaid. At this stage, it is required to be noted that as such the matter was considered by this Court on last date and infact learned advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant was agreeable for compounding the offence and the matter was adjourned to today so as to enable the applicant to bring 15% of the cheque amount so as to enable him to request for compounding of the offence. However, for whatever reason the complainant has turned around. Shri Parthiv Bhatt, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant has requested to adjourn the matter to 8th October 2012 while submitting that in the meantime Board of Bank may take fresh decision on the aforesaid. Hence, as a last chance, stand over to 8th October 2012. Adinterim order/protection granted earlier is directed to be continued till further orders.” R/CR.RA/93/2011 ORDER DATED: 08/04/2026 5. Since the cheque amount of Rs.25,000/- has already been deposited, the only issue which remained was with regard to deposit of the compounding charges at the rate of 15%. For taking instructions from the complainant, namely, Ahmedabad Mercantile Co-operative Bank Ltd., and for passing an appropriate decision or resolution, the matter came to be adjourned from time to time. It is needless to say that in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjabij Tari vs. Kishore S Boarcar & Anr. reported in 2025 INSC 1158, once the offence is compoundable under Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the dispute is essentially civil in nature, no further dispute survives. Moreover, the compounding charges are required to be reduced to 7.5%. 6. In view of the above, the present Revision Application stands disposed of. The judgment and order dated 7.2.2011 passed by Hon'ble Principal Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 196 of 2010 and judgment and order dated 29.4.2010 passed by Hon'ble Judge Metropolitan Magistrate and Negotiable Instruments Act, Court No.1 Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 1345 of 2008 as well as all consequential proceedings initiated in pursuance thereof are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made as absolute to the aforesaid extent. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ALI Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: ISTAYAK ALI(HC01093), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/04/2026 11:23:51