SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2019 Supreme(Guj) 223

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
V.P. PATEL, J.
Prajapati Amrutbhai Bhulabhai - Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat - Respondent
R/Criminal Revision Application No. 430 of 2019 WITH Criminal Misc.Application (Fixing Date Of Early Hearing) No. 2 of 2019 WITH Criminal Misc.Application (Regular Bail) No. 1 of 2019
Decided On : 03-05-2019

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicants : Mr Hardik A Dave
For the Respondents: Mr Vasant R Barot, Ms. C.M. Shah, APP

Headnote:

Criminal Law – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 397 read with Section 401 – Negotiable Instruments Act – Section 138 – Offence of Dishonored of cheque – Amicable settlement between the parties – Applicant/Original Accused has filed this Criminal Misc. Application for fixing an early date of hearing as the main matter i.e. Criminal Revision Application is fixed for hearing in the month of June 2019 – He submitted that as parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, the main matter may be taken up for hearing today instead of finalizing the matter on the date already fixed by this Hon’ble Court – Held, Complainant himself is present before the court, he has submitted that an amount received by him and the compromise is done amount considering the economic condition of the Applicant-Accused. He has no further grievance against the Applicant-Accused. He has identified his signature on the settlement agreement and he has endorsed the contents of the settlement agreement. He has also requested to release the Applicant/Accused from jail – Matter requires consideration. It appears that further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned judgments and orders would amount to abuse of process of law and hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned judgments and orders are required to be quashed and set aside – Even though the imposition of costs by the competent court is a matter of discretion, the scale of costs has been suggested in the interest of uniformity. The competent Court can of course reduce the costs with regard to the specific facts and circumstances of a case, while recording reasons in writing for such variance – Criminal Revision Application is allowed. (Paras 9 to 12)

JUDGMENT :

Order in Criminal Misc. Application No.2/2019 (For Fixing an Early Date of Hearing:

1. The Applicant/Original Accused has filed this Criminal Misc. Application for fixing an early date of hearing as the main matter i.e. Criminal Revision Application No. 430 of 2019 is fixed for hearing in the month of June 2019. He submitted that as the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, the main matter may be taken up for hearing today instead of finalizing the matter on the date already fixed by this Hon’ble Court on 11.6.2019.

2. Learned Advocate for Applicant has produced on record the Settlement Purshis dated 29.4.2019 at Annexure-B.

3. In view of the above fats, the main matter is taken up for hearing today for final disposal.

4. The present Criminal Misc. Application (for fixing an early date of hearing) is disposed of accordingly. Order in Criminal Revision Application No. 430/2019:

5. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Hardik A. Dave for Applicant (Original Accused), learned APP Ms. C.M.Shah for Opponent No.1-State of Gujarat and learned Advocate Mr. Vasant R. Barot appearing for Opponent No.2 (Original Complainant).

Order under challenge

6. By way of this Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the Applicants (Accused) have prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated 10.4.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Arravali at Modasa, in Criminal Appeal No. 46/2018, whereby the learned Judge has dismissed the Appeal and confirmed the judgment and order dated 7.7.2018 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bayad in Criminal Case No. 1052/2014, whereby the Applicant (Accused) is held guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to suffer SI for 1 year with fine of Rs.5.000/-, i.d. of payment of fine, further SI of 1 month.

7. Considering the issue involved in the present case, offence in consideration being compoundable and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the Applicant (Original Accused) and Opponent No.2 (Original Complainant) has been resolved amicably by way of Settlekent Purshis dated 29.4.2019 which is produced on record of Criminal Misc. Application No. 2 of 2019, this application is taken up for final disposal today.

Submission of the Parties:

8. At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the issue and therefore, any further continuance of the proceedings pursuant to the impugned orders as well as any further proceedings arising therefrom would create hardship to the Applicants and would amount to abuse of process of law.

8.1 It is submitted that Opponent No.2-Patel Ramanbhai Kesharbhai has placed on record Settlement Purshis dated 29.4.2019 disclosing that the dispute between the Applicant and Opponent No.2 is resolved. It is further submitted by both the learned advocates that as per the settlement arrived at between the parties, the Opponent No.2-Original Complainant has received the settlement amount as stated in paragraph 2 of the Settlement Purshis and he also gives consent for allowing Criminal Revision Application No. 430 of 2019 and for quashing and setting aside the judgments at Annexure-A & B of the memo of Application.

8.2 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. C.M.Shah appearing for Opponent No.1-State of Gujarat has submitted that considering the offence being compoundable and for maintaining the harmonious relations between the party and in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, just and equitable order may be passed.

Merits of the case

9. In view of the settlement purshis placed on record and statement made before this court that the dispute between the Applicant and Opponent No.2 is resolved, the present Criminal Revision Application deserve consideration.

9.1 That the Complainant-














Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top