IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO.

472 of 2026 =================================================

VIKAS (VIKASBHAI) RAMESHCHANDRA DESAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

=================================================

Appearance:

MR. NISARG D SHAH(7299) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 SUNIL H PRAJAPATI(8350) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 =================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL Date : 17/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate Mr. Rahul V. Shrimali states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent No. 2 herein – original complainant and shall file his Vakalatnama before the Registry. Registry to accept his Vakalatnama.

2. Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor as well as learned advocate appearing for the original complainant waive service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respective respondents.

3. Considering the issue involved in the present application, with the 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 today as alleged offence is compoundable.

4. By this revision application under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short “BNSS”) read with section 442 of BNSS, the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order dated 11.02.2025 passed by the learned 10^th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in Criminal Case No. 8184 of 2022, whereby the trial Court held the applicant guilty for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short “NI Act”) and sentenced to imprisonment and also directed to pay the cheque amount to the original complainant as compensation. The said order was assailed before the learned 11^th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara by way of Criminal Appeal No. 274 of 2025, which came to be dismissed vide judgment and order dated 07.02.2026 and the order of conviction has been confirmed and upheld. Aggrieved thereby, this revision application is filed.

5. Learned advocate for the applicant has taken this Court through the factual matrix arising out of the present application.

However, 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.

6. Learned advocate for original complainant has reiterated the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the applicant. Original complainant – Prakashchandra C. Panchal appeared before the Court and is identified by the learned advocate for the original complainant. The complainant affirms the factum of settlement. He has also filed an affidavit, which is taken on record, stating therein that he has no objection if the judgment and orders impugned in this revision application are quashed and set aside. He also states that he has filed the affidavit without any coercion, threat or undue influence. On inquiry made by the Court, the original complainant has declared before this Court that the dispute between the applicant and the original complainant is resolved and cheque amount has already been received by the original complainant and therefore, now the grievance stands redressed. It is, therefore, submitted that the present application may be allowed.

7. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the extant law, Court may pass appropriate orders.

8. Considering the fact that the dispute is settled between the parties and that the applicant has paid the cheque amount to the complainant and said fact has been confirmed by the complainant, as the offence is compoundable on