Back
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
R.M. Doshit, J
PRAFULL KANTILAL THAKKAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No 291 of 2000 | CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No 292 of 2000
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR VASANT S SHAH
For the Respondents: MR LR PUJARI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MR BK DAVE
Compromise in a criminal case can lead to quashing of imprisonment while maintaining financial penalties.
Headnote:This judgment addresses two Revision Applications under Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC, concerning convictions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioners were sentenced to simple imprisonment and fine due to bounced checks. A settlement was reached between the parties, confirming compliance with settlement terms in court. Notably, following the Supreme Court's precedent in Mahender Singh vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, the court upheld the conviction but quashed the sentence of imprisonment, affirming the fine imposed. The revisions were allowed accordingly.
JUDGEMENT
#. These two Revision Applications under Section 397 read with Section 401 CrPC have been preferred by the accused in Criminal Cases Nos.619/97 and 1129/97 against the orders of conviction recorded by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad Court No.16 under his judgment and order dated 28th September, 1998 and confirmed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad Court No.9 in Criminal Appeals Nos.132/98 and 133/98.
#. In both the above referred criminal cases, the petitioner has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act , 1881 and has been sentenced to Simple Imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs.4,000=00. In default of payment of fine, a further Simple Imprisonment for one month has been imposed.
#. Pending these Revision Applications, the matter at dispute has been settled between the complainant and the accused. The settlement duly signed by the complainant and the accused and their advocates respectively have been placed on record. The complainant - respondent no.2 who is present in the court agrees that the terms of the settlement have been carried out.
#. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of MAHENDER SINGH vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ANR. [JT 2000(8) SC 111], conviction of the petitioner is confirmed. The sentence of imprisonment imposed upon the petitioner in above referred Criminal Cases Nos.619/97 and 1129/97 is quashed and set aside. The sentence of fine imposed upon the petitioner is confirmed. The Revision Applications are allowed to the above extent. Rule nisi issued in each of the applications is made absolute accordingly.
26th December, 2001.( Ms. R.M. Doshit, J. ) /sakkaf
