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

2025 Supreme(GUJ) 680

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2025 In R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1969 of 2024 With CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 2 of 2025 In R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1969 of 2024 ==========================================================
MAHESHKUMAR CHAMANLAL MATHRANI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR HARDIK METHA, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 12/03/2025

Petitioner Advocates:MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) ,Respondent Advocate: PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(2)

The court emphasized the necessity for the complainant to prove a legally enforceable debt in dishonor of cheque cases, allowing bail pending revision due to insufficient evidence.

Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 438 and 442 - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - Quashing of conviction - The applicant sought to quash the conviction for dishonor of cheque, arguing that the complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt and that the trial court erred in its judgment. The applicant was granted bail pending revision application, subject to conditions including deposit of the remaining cheque amount. (Paras 2, 3, 4)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Bail - Conditions for bail include not misusing liberty, not leaving the country without permission, and providing a current address to the court. (Paras 4, 5)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was convicted under Section 138 of the N.I. Act for dishonoring a cheque of Rs.2,85,600/- and sentenced to one year of simple imprisonment, with a requirement to pay compensation. The conviction was upheld by the appellate court.

Findings of Court:
The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon depositing the remaining cheque amount and fulfilling certain conditions.

Issues: The main issues included whether the complainant proved the existence of a legally enforceable debt and the appropriateness of the trial court's conviction.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the applicant had an arguable case and that the complainant's evidence was insufficient to uphold the conviction. The court emphasized the importance of proper examination of evidence in such cases.

Result: Application allowed.

ORDER :

(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)

ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.2 OF 2025

1. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent State.

2. By way of this application under Section 438 read with Section 442 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”), the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 17.05.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palanpur District Banaskantha, in Criminal Case No. 1095/2018, 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 one year and also directed to pay the cheque amount i.e. Rs.2,85,600/- towards compensation to the original complainant within 30 days and in default of payment of compensation further SI for a period of three months, as well as order dated 12.12.2024 by which learned 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Palanpur District Banaskantha, dismissed Criminal Appeal No.206/2023 and confirmed the judgment and order of conviction of learned JMFC. Hence, this Revision Application is filed.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application and submitted that, the both the courts below have erred in recording conviction though the complainant failed to prove their case. Further, the learned Courts below failed to appreciate the evidence in its true perspective though the complainant failed to prove legally enforceable debt and the defense made by the complainant was not properly examined by the trial Court. Further, the accused have rebutted presumption and complainant has failed to prove case against the applicant. Considering the aforesaid facts, the applicant has case and arguable case. Even without entering into merit of the case, the applicant has submitted that, the applicant is in custody. However, the applicant has deposited Rs.57,120/- which is 20% of the check amount before the trial Court and now are ready and willing to deposit remaining amount of Rs.2,28,480/- with the learned trial Court if the sentence imposed against the applicant is suspended pending the present criminal revision application.

4. Pending the main matter i.e. Criminal Revision Application No. 1969 of 2024, the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail subject to the applicant depositing Rs.2,28,480/- with the learned trial Court within two weeks and sentence imposed upon the applicant vide order dated 17.05.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Palanpur District Banaskantha, in Criminal Case No. 1095/2018 as well as order dated 12.12.2024 passed by the learned 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Palanpur District Banaskantha, in Criminal Appeal No.206/2023 are suspended by executing a fresh bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, on conditions that applicant:-

(a) shall not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

(b) shall not leave India without prior permission of this Court.

(c) shall furnish the present address of residence to the Court concerned at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without the prior permission of this Court.

(d) shall proceed with the Criminal Revision Application as and when listed and shall not prolong the hearing of the same.

(e) The Trial Court shall invest the said amount in a Fixed Deposit Receipts subject to outcome of the revision.

5. The authorities will release the applicant only if they are not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. The application stands allowed accordingly.

Direct service is permitted.

ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2025

Since the m

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top