##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 2727 of 2026 ==========================================================

NAVINKUMAR GANESHJI SOLANKI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

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

Appearance:

MR DK CHAUDHARI(5361) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT , APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 18/09/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Learned advocate Mr. Rhythm Patel submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent No.2 – original complainant and seeks permission to file his appearance.

Registry to accept.

2. Rule. Learned APP waives service of rule for the respondent No.1-State and learned advocate Mr. Rhythm Patel for the respondent No.2.

3. Learned advocate Mr. D.K. Chaudhari for the applicant and learned advocate Mr. Rhythm Patel for the respondent No.2 – original complainant, jointly submit that the matter is amicably settled between the parties and the present application be taken up for final hearing and be disposed of accordingly.

4. In view of the above submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.

5. By way of the present application, the applicant – accused has prayed to quash and set aside the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Deesa in Criminal Appeal No. 25 of 2024 dated 10.09.2025 confirming the judgment and order passed by the learned 2nd Additional Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Deesa, Banaskantha in Criminal Case No. 1966 of 2022 dated 29.01.2024, whereby, the present applicant - accused was sentenced simple imprisonment for one year and has been ordered to pay an amount of Rs.2,20,000/- as compensation to the complainant within thirty days, and in default, simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

6. Heard learned advocate Mr. D.K. Chaudhari for the applicant, learned APP Mr. Yuvraj Brahmbhatt for the respondent No.1 – State and learned advocate Mr. Rhythm Patel for the respondent No.2 – original complainant.

7. Learned advocate Mr. D.K. Chaudhari for the applicant submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled 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. Learned advocate further submits that the applicant at present is in custody undergoing the sentence.

8. Learned advocate Mr. Rhythm Patel for the respondent No.2 – original complainant submits that the respondent No.2, Rupabhai Maganbhai Patel, - original complainant is present in-person before the Court and has produced a copy of affidavit of the respondent No.2 – original complainant, which is taken on record.

9. Learned APP Mr. Yuvraj Brahmbhatt 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.

10. The respondent No.2 – original complainant is present in-person before the 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 of his own free will wi