R/CR.RA/1925/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 1925 of 2025 ========================================= JAGUNATH RAGHUNATH PARMAR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================= Appearance: MR RAJDIPSINH M MAKWANA(13031) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR SIDDHANT J PARASHAR(12693) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR NIRAJ SHARMA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================= CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 16/10/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent – State. 2. By way of preferring the present petition, the petitioner has sought to challenge the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court for the o昀昀ence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, which has been con昀椀rmed by the learned 昀椀rst appellate court. On the basis of the concurrent 昀椀ndings, it transpires that the petitioner is in judicial custody. 3. After verifying voluntary character of the compromise, by which the complainant has compounded the o昀昀ence of section 138 of NI Act, which is permissible in view of section 147 of NI Act and as the parties have amicably settled their dispute and in support thereof the learned advocate for the R/CR.RA/1925/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025 applicant has produced No Due Certi昀椀cate which is issued by the Respondent no. 2. The impugned order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Trial Court and con昀椀rmed by the learned 昀椀rst appellate Court is required to be quashed and set aside in order to secure ends of justice and accordingly, they are quashed and set aside. 4. In view of this, the applicant shall not be under obligation to serve the remaining sentence and the applicant shall be treated as acquitted on account of compounding of o昀昀ence with the complainant. 5. In light of the decision rendered by the Honble Apex Court in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu V/s. Sayed Babalal H. reported in AIR 2010 SC 1907, the applicant is required to pay 7.5% of the cheque amount by way of cost with the High Court State Legal Services Committee in accordance with the guidelines laid-down in the said decision. In para 17 of the said decision, the Honble Apex Court has also observed that the Court can reduce the costs with regard to the speci昀椀c facts and circumstances of the case. The applicant is directed to deposit 7.5% of the cheque amount with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority. 6. Accordingly, the present application stands allowed subject to payment of 7.5% of the cheque amount by the applicant with the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority at the time of the execution of bond and to produce the receipt thereof on record of this 昀椀le. R/CR.RA/1925/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025 7. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service permitted. Since the applicant is in the Jail authority, the Jail Authority is directed to release the applicant forthwith if not required in any other case. (R. T. VACHHANI, J) Kaushal Rathod Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: KAUSHAL MAHESHBHAI RATHOD(HCD0078), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 16/10/2025 17:54:57