R/CR.RA/660/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 660 of 2021 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR ========================================================== Approved for Reporting Yes No ========================================================== THAKOR DINESHBHAI DHARAMSINHBHAI Versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: MITTAL N PATEL(7614) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR PM DAVE(263) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 17/03/2026 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of the present application, the applicant has sought the following relief: “(B) Allow this petition by quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 09/08/2021 passed by Learned 2nd Add. Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2019 (at Annexure A) and be further pleased to quash and set aside the order passed by the Ld. 2nd Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana in Criminal Case No. 9887/2016 dated 29/01/2019 after calling upon the record and proceedings from the Ld. Trial Court in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix of the present application. At the R/CR.RA/660/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026 outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the dispute. It is further submitted that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the present application deserves to be considered. 3. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the present application and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, the present application may not be entertained. 4. Learned advocate for original complainant has reiterated the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant. The learned advocate for original complainant also relied upon the affidavit filed by Mr. Himanshu Kadiya authorized person of HDFC Bank original complainant who is also personally present in person before the Court. The affidavit sworn by the original complainant is taken on record. On inquiry made by the Court, original complainant has declared before this Court that the dispute between the applicant and the original complainant is resolved and therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed. 5. In view of the above, it appears that during the pendency of the present application the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. In this regard, respondent No.2 has filed an affidavit on record stating in para 7 as under: “7. I say and submits that I have gone through the memo of Criminal Revision application and the facts and grounds stated in the memo of petition are not disputed by me, because Applicant had already settled the matter by depositing settled amount and now account of R/CR.RA/660/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026 Applicant is closed and therefore, the disputes and grievances of both the sides have been amicably settled. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, if the judgment and order of conviction passed by ld. 2nd Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mehsana in Criminal Case no. 9887 of 2016 dtd. 29.01.2019 as well as judgment and order dtd. 09.08.2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No 31 of 2019 by Ld. 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana, whereby confirmed the judgment and order of sentence passed by Ld. 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mehsana against the Applicant-Ori. accused may be quashed and set aside in accordance with law.” 6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and considering the material placed on record, it appears that the dispute between the parties has now been amicably resolved. The complainant has filed an affidavit stating that he has no objection if the complaint is quashed. Therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings further. However, since the accused has settled the dispute at a belated stage before this Court, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sanjabij Tari vs. Kishore S Boarcar & Anr. reported in 2025 INSC 1158, the accused is required to deposit 7.5% of the cheque amount as costs. Accordingly, the applicant is directed to deposit Rs.15,000/- (7.5% of Rs.2,00,000/-) with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority. 7. Resultantly, the present Revision Application stands disposed of in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties. The judgment and order dated 09/08/2021 passed by Learned 2nd Add. Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2019 and the judgment and order 29/01/2019 passed by the Ld. 2nd Add. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana in Criminal Case No. 9887/2016, are hereby quashed and set aside, along with all R/CR.RA/660/2021 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/03/2026 consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the present applicant. If the applicant is in custody, the concerned jail authority shall release the applicant forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case. Direct service is permitted. (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 17/03/2026 18:04:04