High Court of Gujarat
MANSHAN ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.versusKAILASHBHAI MOTILAL BAROT PROPRIETOER OF KAILASHBHAI MOTILAL BAROT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- GITA GOPI
Holding
The conviction under Section 138 NI Act is quashed and the applicant is acquitted as the offence is deemed compounded with the complainant's consent.
Summary
The applicant, Manshan Engineering Pvt. Ltd., was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to one year imprisonment, a conviction later affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge. The parties subsequently settled the dispute, with the complainant consenting to compound the offence under Section 147 of the NI Act and confirming receipt of Rs.58,000. The High Court, noting the consent and full payment, applied the principle that compounding under Section 147 overrides the procedural bar of Section 320(1) CrPC, as cited in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Baba Lal. Consequently, the court quashed the conviction, acquitted the applicant, and ordered the deposited amount to be released to the complainant. The revision application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Can a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act be set aside on the ground of compounding the offence with the complainant's consent under Section 147?
- Does the consent of the aggrieved party and full payment allow the court to override Section 320(1) of the CrPC in compounding the offence?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 320(1)
- Negotiable Instruments Acts. 138, s. 147
Subjects
Negotiable Instruments ActSection 138Section 147compounding of offencesCriminal RevisionAcquittalConsent of complainantSection 320 CrPC
Judgment
R/CR.RA/2001/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 2001 of 2025
==========================================================
MANSHAN ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. & ANR.
Versus
KAILASHBHAI MOTILAL BAROT PROPRIETOER OF KAILASHBHAI
MOTILAL BAROT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NIRAV C THAKKAR(2206) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2
MR NIRAJ SHARMA APP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 24/04/2026
ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Uvesh M.Shaikh seeks permission
to file vakalatnma on behalf of respondent no.1 - original
complainant. Permission is granted. Office to accept
vakalatnama of Mr. Shaikh.
2. RULE. Learned advocates waive service of Rule on
behalf of the respective respondents.
3. The applicant-accused had been convicted by the
learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad
on 17.07.2023 in Criminal Case No.20668 of 2018 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 04.10.2025 by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.415 of
Page 1 of 3
R/CR.RA/2001/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
2023.
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. Respondent No.1 - Original complainant is present
before this Court along with learned advocate Mr. Uvesh
M.Shaikh, who has placed on record the affidavit filed by the
respondent No.1 – original complainant and stated that the
amount, as agreed between the parties has already been paid.
The same is taken on record. Respondent No.1 - original
complainant has affirmed the contents of the affidavit and
stated that amount of Rs.58,000/-, which was deposited before
the Nazir of the concerned Court be ordered to be paid to
him.
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
Page 2 of 3
R/CR.RA/2001/2025 ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026
under Section 147 thereof, the matter is considered as
compounded.
7. In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order
of conviction and sentence dated 17.07.2023 passed by the
learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad
in Criminal Case No.20668 of 2018 for the offence punishable
under Section 138 of the NI Act, which was affirmed
04.10.2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,
Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.415 of 2023, are quashed
and set aside. The applicant stands acquitted. The amount of
Rs.58,000/-, deposited before the Nazir of the concerned
Court is ordered to be paid to the complainant on proper
verification of identity.
8. 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)
Pankaj/41
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 24/04/2026 17:43:39
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