High Court of Gujarat
MANSUKHBHAI KHIMABHAI VATUKIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- GITA GOPI
Holding
The conviction under Section 138 is quashed and the applicant acquitted because the offence was validly compounded with the complainant's consent under Section 147, which prevails over the earlier judgment.
Summary
Mansukhbhai Khimabhai Vatukiya filed a criminal revision challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which had been affirmed by the Sessions Court. The original complainant, Gulammahamad Ahmadbhai Badi, appeared before the High Court and submitted an affidavit confirming that the disputed amount had been fully paid and that he consented to compound the offence. Relying on Section 147 of the NI Act, which permits compounding with the aggrieved party's consent, and the overriding effect of CrPC Section 320(1) as interpreted in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Baba Lal, the Court held that the matter was compounded. Consequently, the conviction and sentence were quashed, the applicant was acquitted, and ordered to be released from jail. The revision application was allowed and the rule made absolute.
Issues considered
- Whether a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be set aside when the complainant consents to compound the offence under Section 147.
- Whether the consent of the aggrieved party under Section 147 overrides the earlier conviction in light of CrPC Section 320(1).
- Effect of full payment and settlement of the dispute on the continuance of criminal liability.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 320(1)
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881s. 138, s. 147
Subjects
Negotiable Instruments ActSection 138Section 147Compounding of offenceCriminal revisionSettlementAcquittalCrPC Section 320Gujarat High Court
Judgment
R/CR.RA/1310/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 1310 of 2026
==========================================================
MANSUKHBHAI KHIMABHAI VATUKIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. HARISINGH SODHA(17638) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 01/05/2026
ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Mohitsinh A.Jadeja seeks
permission to file vakalatnma on behalf of respondent no.2 -
original complainant. Permission is granted. Office to accept
vakalatnama of Mr. Jadeja.
2. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of Rule on
behalf of the respective respondents.
3. By way of this application, the applicant – revisionist
challenges the judgment of conviction and sentence dated
15.02.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Wankaner in Criminal Case No.1252 of 2021 under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The above
sentence was challenged by way of an appeal and the same
was confirmed on 11.07.2025 by the learned Sessions Judge,
Page 1 of 3
R/CR.RA/1310/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026
Morbi in Criminal Appeal No.14 of 2022.
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. Original complainant–Mr.Gulammahamad Aahamadbhai
Badi is present before this Court along with learned advocate
Mr. Jadeja, who has placed on record the affidavit filed by the
respondent no.2–original complainant and stated that the
amount, as agreed between the parties has already been paid.
The same is taken on record. Respondent No.2 - original
complainant has affirmed the contents of the affidavit and
stated that total amount has been received.
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
Page 2 of 3
R/CR.RA/1310/2026 ORDER DATED: 01/05/2026
compounded.
7. In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order
of conviction and sentence dated 15.02.2022 passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate, Wankaner in Criminal Case
No.1252 of 2021 for the offence punishable under Section 138
of the NI Act, as affirmed on 11.07.2025 by the learned
Sessions Judge, Morbi in Criminal Appeal No.14 of 2022, are
quashed and set aside. The applicant stands acquitted. The
applicant be released from the jail forthwith.
8. Accordingly, the present application is allowed in the
above terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted. Registry to communicate this
order to the concerned Court/authority by Fax or Email
forthwith.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Pankaj
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 01/05/2026 17:40:48
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "Negotiable Instruments Act"Sign in to search