GOVINDBHAI BHULABHAI PRAJAPATIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.RA/265/2017                            JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
      NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 265 of 2017


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

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

             Approved for Reporting             Yes          No

============================================
               GOVINDBHAI BHULABHAI PRAJAPATI
                              Versus
                   STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
============================================
Appearance:
HEMANG S BHARWAD(8288) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
SAHIL B TRIVEDI(8476) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ROHAN RAVAL, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
SHRIKAR H BHATT(2573) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
============================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                           Date : 23/03/2026

                            ORAL JUDGMENT


1)       By way of present revision application the applicant has prayed

         for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of

         conviction and sentence dated 03.03.2017 passed by the

         learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Himmatnagar, District -

         Sabarkantha in Criminal Appeal No.49 of 2014, whereby, the

         trial Sessions Judge has dismissed the appeal by upholding the

         order of conviction and sentence dated 07.06.2014 in Criminal



                                  Page 1 of 4
     R/CR.RA/265/2017                              JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




         Case No.859 of 2011, passed by the learned 2 nd Additional Chief

         Judicial Magistrate, Himmatnagar, holding the applicant guilty

         for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable

         Instruments Act (which shall hereinafter be referred to as “NI

         Act” for short) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment

         of one year and also directed the applicant to pay compensation

         of Rs.5,30,000/- to the complainant and in default of payment of

         fine to undergo further simple imprisonment of three months.

         Hence, the present Revision Application is filed by the applicant-

         accused.



2)       When the matter is called out the learned Advocate for the

         applicant remained absent. Learned Advocate Mr. Shrikar H.

         Bhatt, for the respondent no.2 – complainant appeared and

         submitted that the complainant has received the amount and

         dispute is settled. It appears that the applicant is not interested

         to proceed with the matter and hence the averments made in

         the revision application is considered. Perusing the concurrent

         findings and the fact that the impugned amount has already

         been paid to the complainant.


3)       In view of above once the amount being deposited and as the

         offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is quasi-criminal in

         character and is compoundable and punishment under the NI

         Act is not a means of seeking retribution but is more a means to


                                   Page 2 of 4
     R/CR.RA/265/2017                              JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




         ensure payment of money and to promote credibility of cheques

         as a trustworthy substitute for cash payment. In absence of any

         perversity and no ground is found to upset the concurrent

         findings of the learned trial Court and Appellate Court and it is

         not open for Revisional Court to re-analyse and re-interpret the

         evidence in revisional jurisdiction. No case is made out to

         interfere with the reasons assigned by both the Courts.


4)       At the same time this Court has taken into consideration the

         object of the Act as accused made payment and complainant has

         received the same, hence, in view of judgment of the Hon’ble

         Supreme Court Sanjabij Tari Vs Kishore S. Borcar, Neutral

         Citation 2025 INSC 1158, maintaining the conviction this Court

         is inclined to extend the benefit under the Probation of Offenders

         Act, 1958, to the applicant-accused.


5)       Accordingly, the applicant – accused is directed to be released

         on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the Probation of

         Offenders Act, upon execution of probation bond in sum of

         Rs.20,000/-, with one surety of like amount for a period of one

         (1) year.


6)       It is hereby further directed that the applicant - accused shall

         receive the sentence as and when called upon till the said period

         and the applicant shall maintain peace during above mentioned



                                  Page 3 of 4
     R/CR.RA/265/2017                                                              JUDGMENT DATED: 23/03/2026




           period of one (1) year.


7)        The above mentioned bond under Section 4 of the Probation of

           Offenders Act, be submitted before the learned trial Court within

           15 days of passing of this judgment.



8)        It is kept open for the complainant that in case of any defect he

           shall revive the proceedings i.e. revision application.


9)        Accordingly, present revision application is disposed of. Record

           and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned Court

           forthwith.




                                                                           (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ANKIT JANSARI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: ANKIT YOGESHBHAI JANSARI(HCW0109), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE I, at High Court of Gujarat on 24/03/2026 17:04:02




                                                       Page 4 of 4