IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 68 of 2024 With CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (REGULAR BAIL) NO. 1 of 2024 In R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 68 of 2024 ==========================================================

VALAND RAJESHBHAI BUDHABHAI Versus SAMARTHAN CAPITAL THROUGH PATEL KETULKUMAR MANHARBHAI ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR ASHOK N PARMAR(2431) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MS.JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 16/01/2024

ORAL ORDER

ORDER IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appears and waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent-State.

ORDER IN CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appears and waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

1] The applicant-original accused has filed the present application for suspension of sentence passed in the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bayad in Criminal Case No. 356 of 2018 dated

13^th September, 2022 as well as judgment and order passed by the learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Aravalli in Criminal Appeal No. 158 of 2022 dated 30^th December, 2023.

2] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the original complainant i.e. respondent no. 1 had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against the applicant and at the end of the trial, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bayad has been pleased to convict the accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 and sentence the applicant- accused to one year simple imprisonment and ordered to pay an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant and in default further three months simple imprisonment.

2.1] Being aggrieved with the same, the applicant had filed Criminal Appeal No. 158 of 2022 under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bayad at Aravalli and the learned Additional Judge was pleased to reject the appeal of the accused and confirmed the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Bayad.

2.2] Learned advocate for the applicant submits that throughout the applicant was on bail pending appeal and after the date of pronouncement of the judgement and order of learned 2^nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bayad at Aravalli, the applicant was directed to surrender before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bayad and the applicant was taken into custody and thereafter, the applicant is in custody since then to undergo the sentence of imprisonment as ordered by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate and has urged this Court to suspend the sentence of the applicant.

2.3] Learned advocate for the applicant has further submitted that the applicant has deposited 25% of the cheque amount i.e. Rs.3,00,000/-, before the learned Appellate Court and is ready and willing to deposit further 25% of the cheque amount within a period of three weeks and hence has requested this Court that the execution of the impugned judgment and order of sentence may be suspended and the applicant-accused may be released on bail on any terms and condition that may be imposed by this Court.

3] Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State has opposed to suspend the sentence of the accused and has submitted that the present application may not be considered.

4] Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State.

5] As per the say of the learned advocate for the applicant, the accused has deposited the 25% amount of the c