IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 1518 of 2018 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No √

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

GAUTAMSINH KIRITSINH RANA Versus BHARATSINH J ZALA & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR ABHISHEK M MEHTA(3469) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 DEVANGI B SOLANKI(8888) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 H P BAXI(9459) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR. KANVA M. ANTANI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s) No. 2 RASHIDA J BAJI(9499) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI Date : 20/02/2026

JUDGMENT

1 RULE returnable forthwith. Learned advocates appearing for the respective respondents waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondents.

2 By way of present revision application, the revisionist applicant seeks to challenge the order dated 30.12.2017 passed by the 7^th learned Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rajkot in Criminal case No.11177 of 2006.

3 The facts leading to filing of the present revision application is that the revisionist applicant is the original complainant and he had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short), for dishonor of Cheque No.028937 dated 05.05.2006 for an amount of Rs.10 lakhs issued by the respondent. The cheque came to be dishonored with the reason “insufficient funds”, which came to be intimated to the revisionist applicant by way of memo dated 01.11.2006, and thereafter, the revisionist applicant was issued statutory notice under the provisions of the Act.

3.1 Subsequent to the issuance of the statutory notice, a complaint came to be filed by the applicant which was registered as Criminal Case No.11177 of 2006. Pursuant to verification, summons were issued and the 7th Additional Senior Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rajkot, (hereinafter referred to as “the Trial Court” for short), was pleased to issue summons on 20.12.2006. Thereafter, the criminal case was pending for more than 11 years during which, the parties had submitted documentary evidence and had also led oral evidence, including examination-in-chief as well as cross-examination. The questions were also put by the learned Trial Court to the respondent under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short “the Code”).

3.2 It is the case of the revisionist applicant that while the proceedings were pending and were at the fag end of completion, the respondent preferred an application dated

10.10.2017 below Exh.40 seeking permission to deposit an amount of Rs.10 lakhs in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s Meters and Instruments Pvt Ltd & Anr vs. Kanchan Mehta., reported in AIR 2017 SC 4594. Another application came to be preferred by the respondent below Exh.51 for accepting the cheque of Rs.10 lakhs and to dispense with the compensation, interest and cost in light of the judgement in the case of M/s. Meters and Instruments Pvt Ltd (supra).

3.3 Subsequent to the application preferred by the respondent, the learned Trial Court was pleased to pass an order dated 19.12.2017, directing the respondent to deposit an amount of Rs.10 lakhs towards the cheque amount of Rs.4 lakhs towards interest and cost and also ordered that the same be deposited with the Trial Court or with the petitioner failing which, the criminal case would be continued to be heard on merits.

3.4 The respondent deposited the amount of Rs.14 lakhs with the Nazir of the Trial Court on 30.12.2017 and on the same day, the learned Trial Court passed an order of discharge under Section 258 of the Code.

3.5 Being aggrieved and affected by the ord