RAVISHANKAR RAMSHUMRAMversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.RA/2152/2025                                              ORDER DATED: 09/04/2026




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
          NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 2152 of 2025

==========================================================
                          RAVISHANKAR RAMSHUMRAM
                                    Versus
                           STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KARAN Y VYAS(8539) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VISHAL T. PATEL(6518) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR BHARGAV PANDYA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI

                                    Date : 09/04/2026

                                         ORDER


1.     RULE. Learned advocates waive service of Rule on behalf of
       the respective respondents.


2.     Challenge in this Revision Application is given to the judgment
       and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.11.2023,
       passed by the learned Principal Judicial Magistrate First Class,
       Mansa       in    Criminal     Case     no.1008         of     2021,     which         was
       confirmed by the judgment and order dated 29.10.2025
       passed       by    the   learned       2nd      Additional       Sessions         Judge,
       Gandhinagar in Criminal Appeal no.249 of 2023.


3.     Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the
       affidavit-in-reply cum compromise affidavit has been placed
       on record of the power of attorney, who is the real brother of
       the     complainant.         By   way        of   power        of    attorney,         the
       complainant-brother            has     given      all   the       power      to    Patel


                                         Page 1 of 3
      R/CR.RA/2152/2025                           ORDER DATED: 09/04/2026




        Dilipkumar Madhabhai, who is before this Court.

3.1     Patel Dilipkumar Madhabhai has stated that the total 50% of
        the cheque amount is before the trial court and the rest of the
        amount has been paid in cash and since he has received the
        total money, he under the instructions of his brother, does not
        want to proceed with the matter and stated that his brother
        has expressed the desire to compound the dispute.


4.      Learned advocate for respondent no.2 – original complainant
        has placed on record the affidavit-in-reply cum compromise
        affidavit and stated that the complainant has received the
        amount as agreed between the parties and the complainant
        does not want to pursue the matter now in view of amicable
        settlement and has given consent for compounding the
        offence. The same is taken on record. Today, respondent no.2
        is present before this Court and the respondent no.2 has
        affirmed the contents of the affidavit and is identified by
        learned advocate Mr. Vishal Patel for respondent no.2.

5.      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 amount has been paid to



                                Page 2 of 3
        R/CR.RA/2152/2025                                                    ORDER DATED: 09/04/2026




           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.


  6.       In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order
           passed by the learned Trial Court of conviction and sentence
           for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, as
           affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, are quashed and set
           aside. The applicant stands acquitted.


  6.1      The amount of Rs.3,25,000/- which is deposited before the
           trial Court as well as the appellate Court has to be paid to
           Patel Dilipkumar Madhabhai on behalf of his brother as the
           power of attorney holder. Thus, the trial Court as well as the
           appellate Court are directed to pay the amount as deposited
           in connection with the proceedings under Section 138 of the
           present matter to                Patel Dilipkumar Madhabhai by verifying
           copy of the power of attorney and by verifying the identity.


  7.       Accordingly, the present application is allowed in the above
           terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
           service is permitted.




                                                                                          (GITA GOPI,J)
  PARMAR KRISH/287


Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: PARMAR KRISH(HC02348), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/04/2026 18:18:16




                                                  Page 3 of 3