R/CR.RA/1105/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 1105 of 2025 ============================================ VASANTKUMAR MULJIBHAI CHAUDHARY Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ============================================ Appearance: MR. HARSHAL S. PATEL(14220) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR.DIPEN F CHAUDHARI(6740) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ============================================ CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 17/07/2025 ORAL ORDER Learned advocate Mr. Prakash K. Desai, states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and thereby, seeks permission to file his Vakalatnama. Registry is directed to accept the vakalatnama. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. [1.0] RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents. [2.0] Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicant and original complainant has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith as alleged offence is bailable and compoundable. [3.0] By way of this application under section 438 of BNSS read with Section 442 of BNSS, the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur – Banaskantha in Criminal Case No.4034 of 2022, whereby the Trial Court has been pleased to hold the applicant guilty for R/CR.RA/1105/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025 the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one year and also directed to pay cheques amount to the original complainant as compensation. The said order was assailed before the learned 4th Additional District Judge, Banaskantha – Palanpur by way of impugned Judgment and order of sentence dated 21.06.2025 in Criminal Appeal No.125 of 2024, the said appeal came to be dismissed and the order of conviction has been confirmed and upheld by the concerned Additional District Judge. Hence, this Revision Application is filed. [4.0] Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. 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 application deserves consideration. [5.0] 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. [6.0] 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 the original complainant – Ankurkumar Hareshkumar Raval, who is also personally present in person before the Court and is identified by learned advocate for the original complainant. The affidavit of the 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. Therefore, present application may be allowed. [7.0] 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 R/CR.RA/1105/2025 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2025 applicant have settled the matter and in this regard, affidavit of original complainant is taken on record. The contents of the affidavit are also admitted by the original complainant. Even complainant has remained present before this Court and stated that he has no objection if the conviction recorded by the learned Trial Court as well as Appellate Court is set aside. [8.0] Considering the fact that the dispute is settled between the parties and the averment in the affidavit of the complainant that he has received the amount for which he had filed the criminal complaint against the applicant and as offence is compoundable one at any stage under Section 147 of the NI Act, application deserves consideration. But, as the applicant – 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, applicant – accused is required to be saddled with cost. [9.0] Resultantly, this revision application is allowed. The order dated 28.02.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur – Banaskantha in Criminal Case No.4034 of 2022, as well as order dated 21.06.2025 passed by the learned 4th Additional District Judge, Banaskantha – Palanpur in Criminal Appeal No.125 of 2024, are hereby quashed and set aside with respect to the applicant, subject to deposit of 15% of the amount of cheques i.e. Rs.1,05,000/- before the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority. [10.0] On compliance of the said order, if the applicant is behind the bar, he shall be released subject to deposit of aforesaid amount of cost, if his presence is no longer required in any other case. [11.0] The present application is allowed. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) ANKIT Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/07/2025 10:15:40