ORDER :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. Leave to amend is granted. To be carried out accordingly.

2. Rule. Learned APP Mr. Aditya Jadeja and learned advocate Mr. Harshrajsinh S. Vaghela waive service of notice of rule for the respective respondents.

3. By way of this application, the applicant has prayed for quashing of the complaint proceedings/conviction order dated 15.11.2025 passed by learned 2^nd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadiad (District. Kheda) in Criminal Case No. 3452 of 2024 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the N.I.Act) on the ground that during pendency of the proceedings, the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the entire cheque amount along with agreed settlement amount has been paid by the applicant to the respondent.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Rohan Majmudar for the applicant, learned APP Mr. Aditya Jadeja for the respondent no.1 – State and learned advocate Mr. Harshrajsinh S. Vaghela for the respondent no.2 – original complainant.

5. Learned advocate Mr. Rohan Majmudar for the applicant submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled between the parties and the respondent no.2 – original complainant has received the entire settlement amount and does not wish to prosecute the matter further. The compromise has been entered into voluntarily, without any coercion, undue influence or pressure and, therefore, the respondent no.2 has no objection if the impugned judgment and order of conviction as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are quashed against the applicant – accused.

6. Learned advocate Mr. Harshrajsinh S. Vaghela for the respondent no.2 – original complainant submits that the respondent no.2 – original complainant is present before this Court and has produced a copy of affidavit of the respondent no.2 – original complainant, which is taken on record.

7. Learned APP Mr. Aditya Jadeja for the respondent no.1 – State submits that the impugned judgment and order of sentence is just and proper; however, considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is amicably settled, necessary order may be passed.

8. The respondent no.2 – original complainant is present in person before this Court, and on inquiry, submits that the dispute between them has been settled amicably and the entire settlement amount has been received and he does not wish to prosecute the matter further. He admits to the contents of the affidavit and submits that the compromise has been entered into his own free will without any fear, threat and coercion.

9. The affidavit filed by the respondent no. 2 – original complainant reads as under:

“I, Sandipsinh Chudasama, son of Vijaysinh Chudasama, aged about 62 years, Hindu, Indian Inhabitant, residing at Khambhat, District: Anand, Gujarat, do hereby state on solemnly affirm that:

1. I am the sole proprietor of M/s. GM Patel & Sons who is original complainant in Criminal Case No. 3452 of 2024 which was filed before the Hon’ble Trial Court, Nadiad under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. The said Criminal Case No. 3452 of 2024 was to be allowed by the Hon’ble Trial Court vide order dated 15.11.2025 read with 17.11.2025, in which, warrant has been issued by the Hon’ble Trial Court, which is impugned in the present petition.

3. During the pendency of the present petition, the parties have arrived at settlement whereby petitioner has, through its relative, has paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Fifty Thousand only) today as full and final settlement in respect of present proceedings, which amount is received by the respondent No. 2.

4. In view thereof, entire dispute is settled between the parties and there are no other pending dues from the petitioner and said amount of settlement is full and final payment so the respondent no.2 has no objection if the order of conviction dated

15.11.2025 read with order dated 17.11.2025 passed in Criminal Case No. 3452 of