The court quashed the conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act due to the amicable resolution of the dispute, emphasizing the compoundable nature of the offence.

ORDER :

HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.

1. RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned advocate appearing for the Complainant waive service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

2. Mr. Prashant Sharma, learned advocate submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the original complainant and he produced an affidavit on behalf of the complainant stating that the complainant has no objection if the proceeding is quashed. The affidavit is taken on record.

2.1 Considering the issue involved in the present application and with consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the fact that the dispute amongst the applicant and original complainant has been resolved amicably, this application is taken up for final disposal forthwith as alleged offence is bailable and compoundable.

3. By way of this application under Section 397 (section 438 of BNSS) read with Section 401 (section 442 of BNSS) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “CrPC”), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 11.09.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur in Criminal Case No.1599 of 2024, whereby the Trial Court has been pleased to hold the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I. Act and sentenced to undergo SI of 6 months and also directed to pay cheque amount to the original complainant as compensation. The said order was assailed before the learned 3^rd Additional Sessions Judge, Palanpur by way of impugned Judgment and order of sentence dated 02.01.2025 in Criminal Appeal No.420 of 2024. The said appeal came to be dismissed and the order of conviction has been confirmed and upheld by the concerned Additional Sessions Judge. Hence, this Revision Application is filed.

4. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application. At the outset, it is submitted that the parties have amicably resolved the issue. It is further submitted that in view of the fact that the dispute is resolved, present application deserves consideration.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the present application and submitted that considering the seriousness of the offence, present application may be rejected.

6. Learned advocate Ms. Kiran R. Udasi for the Original Complainant has received instructions to appear on behalf of the original-complainant. She is permitted to file her appearance before the Registry.

6.1 Learned advocate for original complainant has reiterated the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant. The learned advocate for original complainant also relied upon the affidavit filed by the original complainant – Solanki Dashrathji Ramaji – Original Complainant who is also personally present in person before the Court and is identified by learned advocate for the original complainant. The affidavit sworn by the original complainant is taken on record. On inquiry made by the Court, original complainant has declared before this Court that the dispute between the applicant and the original complainant is resolved and therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is therefore submitted that the present application may be allowed.

7. At the outset, learned advocates for the respective parties have jointly submitted that matter is settled and now the original complainant does not wants to pursue for the further litigation as complainant and applicant have settled the matter and in this regard, affidavit of original complainant has been placed, which is taken on record. The contents of the affidavit is also admitted by the original complainant. Even complainant has remained present before this Court and stated that he has no objection if the conviction recorded by the learned Trial Court as well as Appellate Court is set aside.

8. Considering the fact that the dispute is settled between the part