HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HDS
RAJUBHAI NAGINBHAI CHUNARA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
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 applicants have prayed for the quashing and setting aside of the judgment and order dated 06.03.2025, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Khambhat, District Anand, in Criminal Appeal No. 37 of 2020 & Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 2020 below Exhibit 28. By the said order, the learned Sessions Court held the applicants guilty of the offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 114 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each, failing which they shall further undergo SI for five days. The applicants were also found guilty under Sections 324 and 114 of the IPC and sentenced to SI for two years along with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each, failing which they shall further undergo SI for 15 days. Additionally, they were convicted under Section 504 of the IPC and sentenced to SI for one year with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, and i
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; if evidence is insufficient, the benefit of doubt favors the accused.
The conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act was erroneous as the complainant failed to prove a legally enforceable debt, warranting interim relief for the applicants.
The court held that the failure of the complainant to prove a legally enforceable debt justified the suspension of the applicant's sentence pending revision.
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.
The court emphasized the necessity for the complainant to prove a legally enforceable debt under the N.I. Act, allowing interim relief and bail pending revision.
The complainant must prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt for conviction under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, and the applicants successfully rebutted the presumption of guilt.
The court emphasized the necessity for the complainant to prove a legally enforceable debt in dishonor of cheque cases, granting interim relief due to insufficient evidence.
The court emphasized that a conviction in a criminal case must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, not merely on preponderance of probabilities.
A compoundable offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act can be resolved amicably, allowing for the quashing of conviction upon settlement, subject to costs.
Bail granted based on time served and nature of injuries, with conditions to ensure compliance with law.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.