Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Gujarat · body

2026 DAILYLAW 665 (GUJ)

PRADIPKUMAR RASIKLAL PATEL v. STATE OF GUJARAT

CR.RA/1177/2026 · 2026-04-22

Gita Gopi

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

R/CR.RA/1177/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 1177 of 2026 ================================================================ PRADIPKUMAR RASIKLAL PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. ================================================================ Appearance: RAVI B SHAH(5346) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR NIRAJ SHARMA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR KK SOLANKI for MR HARDIK CHAMPAVAT for the Respondent(s) No.2 ================================================================ CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 22/04/2026 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 28.06.2024 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gandhinagar in Criminal Case No.1232 of 2021, which was confirmed by the judgment and order dated 15.04.2006 passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Criminal Appeal No.226 of 2024. 3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings, parties have settled the R/CR.RA/1177/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026 disputes amicably outside the Court and that there remains no grievance between them. It is further submitted that the applicant is in jail and therefore, urged this Court to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant. 4. Learned advocate for respondent no.2–original complainant-Mahendrakumar Ambalal Patel, Mr. K.K. Solanki has placed on record the affidavit of settlement filed by the respondent no.2–original complainant and stated that 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, respondent no.2 is present before this Court and the respondent no.2 has affirmed the contents of the affidavit and is identified by learned advocate for respondent no.2. Learned advocates Mr. K.K Solanki appearing with Mr Hardik Champavat seeks permission to file Vakalatnama for the respondent No.2. Let the Vakalatnama/s 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 R/CR.RA/1177/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2026 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as has been observed in the case of Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed 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 affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, are quashed and set aside. The applicant stands acquitted. As it is stated that the applicant is in jail, the applicant is ordered to be released from jail FORTHWITH, on following the appropriate terms and conditions before the concerned authority. 7. In view of the above, the concerned Court is directed to disburse the amount in connection with the present matter, to the complainant on proper verification of the identity. 8. 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 / # 46 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 22/04/2026 14:25:31