CR.RA/318/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No. 318 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No. 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No. 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? No. 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? No. 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? No. ========================================================= DILIPKUMAR CHUNILAL PATEL - Applicant(s) Versus MANUBHAI BABUBHAI PATEL & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR UA TRIVEDI for Applicant(s) : 1, MR HD CHUDASAMA for Respondent(s) : 1, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA Date : 04/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Learned advocate Mr. H.D. Chudasama waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1 and learned A.P.P. Mrs. F.D. Patel waives service of notice of Rule on behalf CR.RA/318/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT of respondent No. 2. 2. With the consent of the learned advocates for the parties, this application is taken up for final hearing today as the offence has been compounded. 3. Learned advocates for the petitioner and learned advocate for the respondent No. 1 have filed compounding pursis dated 4-7-2009 signed by both the parties. It is ordered to be taken on record. 4. Learned advocate for the parties state that the parties have settled the dispute as per the compounding pursis and have compounded the offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act therefore the impugned judgment passed by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court may be quashed and set aside. 5. The compounding pursis indicates that with the intervention of elderly persons and advocates, the parties have resolved their dispute and the petitioner has no objection if amount of Rs.2,00,000/- deposited by him in this Court is paid to the respondent No.1 – original CR.RA/318/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT complainant. It also indicates that the respondent No. 1 has no objection if the judgment and order 30-12-2006 passed by learned 6th J.M.F.C., Gandhinagar in Criminal Case No. 7034 of 1998 and confirmed by the judgment and order 18-6-2007 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2007 is quashed and set aside. The compounding pursis is signed by the parties. Learned advocates have identified their respective parties. The parties are personally present before the Court and state that they have compounded the offence. The parties state that they have signed the pursis without any fear, coercion, threat or undue influence. 6. It appears from the compounding pursis that the parties have compounded aforesaid offence out of their free will, without fear, undue influence or coercion. Therefore, it is required to be accepted. 7. In view of compounding of the offence by the parties, judgment and order dated 30-12-2006 passed by learned 6th J.M.F.C., Gandhinagar in Criminal Case No. 7034 of 1998 and confirmed by the judgment and order dated 18-6-2007 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar in Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 2007 is quashed and set aside and the petitioner is acquitted for the offence CR.RA/318/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT charged against him. He is on bail hence his bail bond stands cancelled. The amount of fine paid by the petitioner is ordered to be returned to him after due verification. Amount of Rs.2,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner in this Court be paid to the respondent No. 1 by A/c. Payee Cheque after due verification. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. (Bankim N. Mehta, J.) /JVSatwara/