JANI NIRAV BHUPENDERBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 56-DISPOSED AT ADMISSION STAGE
- Bench
- GITA GOPI
Holding
The conviction under Section 138 NI Act was quashed and the accused acquitted on the basis that the offence was compounded with the complainant's consent.
Summary
The accused was convicted by the 2nd Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mahesana, and the conviction was affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge for a Section 138 offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, resulting in a one‑year simple imprisonment. The parties later settled the dispute amicably, with the complainant confirming receipt of the full amount owed and consenting to compound the offence. The accused filed a criminal revision seeking quashal of the conviction on the ground of compounding under Section 147 of the NI Act, supported by the complainant’s affidavit and receipt. The Court held that, in view of the complainant’s consent and the object of Section 147, the offence could be compounded, giving overriding effect to Section 320(1) of the CrPC. Consequently, the conviction and sentence were set aside, the accused was acquitted and ordered to be released forthwith. The revision application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be set aside on the ground of compounding the offence after the judgment, with the complainant's consent.
- Whether Section 147 of the NI Act, together with Section 320(1) of the CrPC, permits the Court to quash a conviction when the dispute is settled and the amount is paid.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 320
- Negotiable Instruments Acts. 138, s. 147
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.RA/1088/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 1088 of 2026
==========================================================
JANI NIRAV BHUPENDERBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. SIDDHARAJ S GADHAVI(19232) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. RICHA GUPTA(18181) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 17/04/2026
ORDER
1. Learned advocate Ms. Riya Gupta seeks permission to
file vakalatnma on behalf of respondent No.2 - original
complainant. Permission is granted. Office to accept
vakalatnama of Ms. Gupta.
2. Rule. Learned advocates waive service of notice of rule
on behalf of for the respective parties.
3. The applicant-accused had been convicted by the
learned 2nd Chief Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahesana
on 29.03.2025 in Criminal Case No.4643 of 2024 for the
offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced him
to undergo one year simple imprisonment, which was upheld
and confirmed on 24.02.2026 by the learned 2 nd Additional
Sessions Judge, Mahesana in Criminal Appeal No.379 of 2025.
Page 1 of 3
R/CR.RA/1088/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026
4. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the
parties have settled the disputes amicably outside the Court
and that there remains no grievance between them.
5. The original complainant – Patel Amitkumar Babulal is
present before this Court through virtual mode. Learned
advocate Ms. Gupta has identified him. The respondent No.2 –
original complainant stated that the entire amount, as agreed
between the parties has already been paid. Respondent No.2 -
original complainant has affirmed the contents of the affidavit
and stated that entire amount had been received. The
affidavit along with copy of receipt is taken on record.
6. Since the complainant has given consent for
compounding the offence, keeping in mind the object of
Section 147 of the NI Act, which is an enabling provision
which provides for compounding the offence and may require
the consent of the aggrieved for compounding the offence,
however, the specific provision under Section 147, inserted by
way of amendment towards special law, would give overriding
effect to sub-section (1) of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 as has been observed in the case of
Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Baba Lal, AIR 2010 SC
1907. Accordingly, as the dispute has been resolved and the
entire amount has been paid to the complainant, in
consonance with the object of the N.I. Act and the provisions
under Section 147 thereof, the matter is considered as
compounded.
Page 2 of 3
R/CR.RA/1088/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/04/2026
7. In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order
of conviction and sentence passed by the learned 2nd Chief
Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mahesana on 29.03.2025 in
Criminal Case No.4643 of 2024 for the offence punishable
under Section 138 of the NI Act, as affirmed on 24.02.2026 by
the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Mahesana in
Criminal Appeal No.379 of 2025, are quashed and set aside.
The applicant stands acquitted. The applicant be released
forthwith.
8. Accordingly, the present application is allowed in the
above terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service today is permitted.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Pankaj/20
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/04/2026 14:56:25
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.