Created byFuzzy Cloud

High Court of Gujarat

MANSHAN ENGINEERING PVT. LTD.versusKAILASHBHAI MOTILAL BAROT

Disposal
58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

Holding

The conviction under Section 138 is quashed and the applicant acquitted as the offence was compounded with the complainant’s consent under Section 147, in accordance with Section 320(1) of the CrPC.

Summary

The High Court of Gujarat entertained a criminal revision application filed by Manshan Engineering Pvt. Ltd. and another against their conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which had resulted in a one‑year simple imprisonment and was affirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge. The parties later settled the dispute, the complainant consented to compound the offence under Section 147 of the NI Act, and deposited Rs 55,000 with the court. The Court examined whether such consent and settlement could overturn the earlier conviction. Relying on the object of Section 147 and the overriding effect of Section 320(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court held that the offence could be compounded and the conviction set aside. Accordingly, the conviction was quashed, the applicant acquitted, and the deposited amount ordered to be paid to the complainant.

Issues considered

  • Whether a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be set aside on the basis of compounding the offence with the complainant’s consent under Section 147 of the NI Act
  • Whether Section 147 of the NI Act overrides the earlier conviction in light of Section 320(1) of the CrPC

Legislation cited

Subjects

Negotiable Instruments ActSection 138Compounding of offencesCriminal revisionAcquittalSettlementConsent of complainantCrPC Section 320

Judgment

     R/CR.RA/2002/2025                                  ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
          NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 2002 of 2025

==========================================================
                  MANSHAN ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. & ANR.
                                 Versus
                    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.20846 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.414 of
2023.


                                      Page 1 of 3
     R/CR.RA/2002/2025                                   ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026




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.55,000/-, 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
under Section 147 thereof, the matter is considered as


                                   Page 2 of 3
         R/CR.RA/2002/2025                                                          ORDER DATED: 24/04/2026




  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.20846 of 2018 for the offence punishable
  under Section 138 of the NI Act, which was affirmed on
  04.10.2025               by       the       learned            Additional             Sessions            Judge,
  Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.414 of 2023, are quashed
  and set aside. The applicant stands acquitted. The amount of
  Rs.55,000/-, 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/42

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 17:42:47




                                                       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

For a digitally signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's own website. Only the court can issue one.