IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 645 of 2026 ================================================================ KALUSINH VAKTUSINH MAKVANA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ================================================================ Appearance: MR PIYUSH B TRIVEDI(12401) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR BHARGAV PANDYA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR RAVI MANDALIYA for the Respondent(s) No.2 ================================================================ CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 12/03/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents. 2. Challenge in this Revision Application is given to the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.01.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Talod in Criminal Case No.211 of 2024, which was confirmed by the judgment and order dated 18.07.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar in Criminal Misc. (Delay Condone) Application No.418 of 2025. 3. Learned advocate for the applicant Mr. Piyush B. Trivedi submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings, p. 1 parties have settled the disputes amicably outside the Court and that there remains no grievance between them. 4. Learned advocate for respondent no.2–original complainant Mr. Ravi Mandaliya has placed on record the afÏdavit of settlement filed by the respondent no.2– original complainant and stated that the complainant has received the amount as agreed between the parties and the complainant does not want to pursue the matter now in view of amicable settlement and has given consent for compounding the offence. The same is taken on record. Today, the respondent no.2 is present before this Court and the respondent no.2 has afÏrmed the contents of the afÏdavit and is identified by learned advocate for respondent no.2. Learned advocate Mr. Ravi Mandaliya seeks permission to file Vakalatnama. Let Vakalatnama be accepted. 5. Since the complainant has given consent for compounding the offence, keeping in mind the object of Section 147 of the NI Act, which is an enabling provision which provides for compounding the offence and may require the consent of the aggrieved for compounding the offence, however, the specific provision under Section 147, inserted by way of amendment towards special law, would give overriding effect to sub-section (1) of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as has been observed in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed p. 2 Baba Lal, AIR 2010 SC 1907. Accordingly, as the dispute has been resolved and the amount has been paid to the complainant, in consonance with the object of the N.I. Act and the provisions under Section 147 thereof, the matter is considered as compounded. 6. In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order passed by the learned Trial Court of conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, as afÏrmed by the learned Appellate Court, are quashed and set aside. The applicant stands acquitted and be released forthwith. 7. Accordingly, the present application is allowed in the above terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. Sd/- (GITA GOPI, J) CAROLINE / DB # 100 p. 3 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: CAROLINE ANTHONISWAMY(HC00212), Principal pvt Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 12/03/2026 18:28:54