IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 623 of 2026 With R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 624 of 2026 ================================================ PARVEZ AYUBBHAI VAHORA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ================================================ Appearance: MR ASHISH M DAGLI(2203) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR ROHAN SHAH, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ================================================ CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL Date : 06/03/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. These revision applications have been preferred by the applicant – original accused praying for to set aside the condition No. 2 imposed vide orders dated 07.01.2026 passed below applications Exh. 4 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 6 and 7 of 2026 by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) whereby, the learned Sessions Judge suspended the sentence imposed by the learned 2nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Criminal Case Nos. 26274 of 2021 and 18605 of 2022 for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable p. 2 Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act), subject to the applicant depositing 20% of the cheque amount within 60 days from those orders. 2. Heard, the learned advocate for the applicant. 3. As the issue involved in these revision applications is limited to imposing of one of the conditions by the first appellate Court while suspending the sentence, no formal notice is issued to the respondent No. 2 herein – original complainant. 4. The learned advocate for the applicant drew attention of the Court to the memo of appeals raising various contentions making out an exceptional case for not depositing the 20% of the cheque amount. However, it transpires from the orders impugned herein, which run into three pages each only, that the contentions raised by the applicant herein with regard to making out an exceptional case for not depositing the 20% amount, are not dealt with and discussed by the learned Sessions Judge in the impugned order. Accordingly, only on that ground the said orders, so far as they impose condition to deposit 20% of the amount, require to be set aside with a view to have the decision thereon afresh. 5. In view of the above, these applications succeed and are allowed in terms of paragraph 6(B) of the respective applications. The Court concerned is directed to deal with and decide the aforesaid aspect of deposit of 20% amount by the applicant herein p. 3 afresh, considering all the contentions that may be raised by both the sides, on merits, in accordance with law, by passing reasoned orders, uninfluenced by the impugned orders herein as well as by this order. 6. The applications, thus, stand disposed of. [ P. M. Raval, J. ] hiren/10-11tss6326