VAGHELA PARTH BABULALversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.MA/14630/2022                              JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026




              IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

       R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE
                     FIR/ORDER) NO. 14630 of 2022


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL
==========================================================

              Approved for Reporting               Yes          No

==========================================================
                          VAGHELA PARTH BABULAL
                                   Versus
                          STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MANAN V PATEL(8059) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KRISHNARAJSINH D CHAUHAN(10648) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
JUCKY LUCKY CHAN(8033) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR. VIKASKUMAR B PATEL(9888) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
ROHAN SHAH APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL

                               Date : 21/07/2026

                              ORAL JUDGMENT


1.        By way of the present petition filed under 482 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set
aside the Criminal Case No. 489/2022 pending before the Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Gandhinagar under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, and process dated 01.07.2022 issued
in the said proceedings qua the present petitioner.


2.        The facts in nutshell are to the effect that:-




                                   Page 1 of 4
     R/CR.MA/14630/2022                           JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026




2.1       That the Original Complainant – Respondent No. 2 herein
had given a friendly loan to the present petitioner and
Respondent No. 4 herein for business purposes amounting to Rs.
8,00,000/-. Against the said loan, Respondent No. 4, who is the
partner of the petitioner, handed over the cheque in question to
the Original Complainant for repayment of the debt. However, the
cheque was dishonoured, and therefore, Criminal Case No.
489/2022 came to be filed before the Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Gandhinagar.


2.2       Pursuant to which, the summons was issued against the
present petitioner on 01.07.2022 and thus, the present petition
before this Court.


3.        Learned Advocate Mr. Manan V. Patel would submit that :-


3.1       The petitioner is not a signatory of the cheque in question.


3.2       The petitioner is not a partner, as the petitioner had
resigned from the partnership firm way back in the year 2019,
more particularly on 28.02.2019. Learned Advocate has placed
reliance on the communication dated 28.02.2019 annexed as
Annexure B (Page No. 15) to the memo of petition to point out
that, as on 28.02.2019, the petitioner was not a partner of the
partnership firm, namely, Parth Enterprise, which was running a
café under the name and style of Bar Eat & Drink.


3.3       Learned Advocate has further placed reliance on the
Affidavit-cum-Declaration (at Page No. 18) annexed to the memo
of the petition to point out that Respondent No. 4 herein, Mayur


                                  Page 2 of 4
     R/CR.MA/14630/2022                         JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026




Dineshbhai Mistri, has also accepted the fact that the petitioner is
no longer a partner in the partnership firm vide letter dated
28.02.2019, which is also signed by Respondent No. 4 herein,
Mayur Dineshbhai Mistri. Thus, it was argued that the cheque was
neither issued by the petitioner nor was he a partner in the
partnership firm, as he had already resigned on 28.02.2019. The
cheque in question was issued by Respondent No. 4 herein,
Mayur Dineshbhai Mistri, on 18.12.2021. Therefore, it was argued
to allow the present petition.


4.        Per contra, Learned Advocate Mr. Rakesh Solanki for
learned Advocate Mr. Jucky Lucky Chan would submit that:-


4.1       The factum of whether the present petitioner had resigned
from the partnership firm is a question to be decided by the Trial
Court during the course of the trial.


4.2 That a notice demanding payment of the cheque amount was
also issued to the present petitioner. However, the present
petitioner did not reply thereto, pursuant to which Criminal Case
No. 489/2022 under the Negotiable Instruments Act came to be
lodged, and summons came to be issued after the Trial Court
found a prima facie case against the present petitioner and thus,
argued to reject the present petition.


5.        Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties.


5.1       The factum of the petitioner having resigned from the
partnership firm way back in the year 2019, more particularly on
28.02.2019, having been accepted by Respondent No. 4 herein,


                                 Page 3 of 4
        R/CR.MA/14630/2022                                                                      JUDGMENT DATED: 21/07/2026




    who also accepted that he would be responsible for all future
    transactions, including issuance of cheques from Account No.
    50200037711290 starting from Cheque No. 000001, clearly
    indicates that the impugned cheque dated 18.12.2021, signed by
    Respondent No. 4 herein and bearing Cheque No. 000007, falls
    outside the scope of the petitioner’s liability in relation to the
    partnership firm. The said fact is further supported by the
    Affidavit-cum-Declaration dated 30.06.2022 placed on record by
    the petitioner, wherein acceptance of the resignation as well as
    responsibility qua Parth Enterprise has been acknowledged by
    Respondent No. 4 herein.


    5.2        Prima facie, it appears from the record that the present
    petitioner has no connection with the issuance of the cheque or
    with Parth Enterprise after having resigned from the partnership
    firm on 28.02.2019. In view of the same, no liability can be
    fastened upon the resigned partner.


    6. In view of the above, the captioned petition stands allowed.
    The Criminal Case No. 489/2022 pending before the Judicial
    Magistrate First Class, Gandhinagar under Section 138 of the
    Negotiable                Instruments                  Act,         along           with         all       consequential
    proceedings arising therefrom qua the present petitioner, stands
    quashed and set aside.


    7. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

                                                                                                             (P. M. RAVAL, J)
    MAHENDRA M PUROHIT

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MAHENDRA MOHANBHAI PUROHIT(HCD0074), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 21/07/2026
16:37:15




                                                                Page 4 of 4