PANKAJ INDRAVADAN CHANDAK PROPRIETOR OF - VEENA ENTERPRISESversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     R/CR.RA/2527/2025                          ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
          NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 2527 of 2025
                              With
        R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 2535 of 2025
                              With
        R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 2581 of 2025
==========================================================
       PANKAJ INDRAVADAN CHANDAK PROPRIETOR OF - VEENA
                         ENTERPRISES
                             Versus
                    STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KULBHUSHAN S PANDEY(13282) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. RAAJEN D JADHAV(10026) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS ANKITA GOSWAMI for the Respondent(s) No. 2
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
                       Date : 13/03/2026
                      COMMON ORDER
1.   RULE. Learned advocates waive service of Rule on behalf of
       the respective respondents.


2.     Challenge in Criminal Revision Application no.2527/2025 is
       given to the judgment and order of conviction and sentence
       dated 16.11.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
       Magistrate, Surat in Criminal Case no.57708/2019, which was
       confirmed by the judgment and order dated 29.11.2025
       passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in
       Criminal Appeal no.1024/2024.


3.     Challenge in Criminal Revision Application no.2535/2025 is
       given to the judgment and order of conviction and sentence
       dated 16.11.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
       Magistrate, Surat in Criminal Case no.57717/2019, which was



                               Page 1 of 3
     R/CR.RA/2527/2025                          ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026




       confirmed by the judgment and order dated 29.11.2025
       passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in
       Criminal Appeal no.1022/2024.


4.     Challenge in Criminal Revision Application no.2581/2025 is
       given to the judgment and order of conviction and sentence
       dated 16.11.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
       Magistrate, Surat in Criminal Case no.57704/2019, which was
       confirmed by the judgment and order dated 29.11.2025
       passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in
       Criminal Appeal no.1023/2024.


5.     Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that during the
       pendency of the proceedings, parties have settled the
       disputes amicably outside the Court and that there remains
       no grievance between them.


6.     Learned advocate for respondent no.2 – original complainant
       has placed on record the affidavit of settlement filed by the
       respondent no.2–original complainant and stated that the
       complainant has received the amount as agreed between the
       parties and the complainant does not want to pursue the
       matter now in view of amicable settlement and has given
       consent for compounding the offence. The same is taken on
       record. Today, respondent no.2 is present before this Court
       and the respondent no.2 has affirmed the contents of the
       affidavit and is identified by learned advocate for respondent
       no.2. Learned advocate seeks permission to file Vakalatnama.
       Let Vakalatnama be accepted.




                               Page 2 of 3
       R/CR.RA/2527/2025                                                           ORDER DATED: 13/03/2026




7.        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 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 compounded.


8.        In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order
          passed by the learned Trial Court of conviction and sentence
          for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, as
          affirmed by the learned Appellate Court, are quashed and set
          aside. The applicant stands acquitted.


9.        In view of the above, the concerned Court is directed to
          disburse the amount to the complainant on proper verification
          of the identity, which was deposited before the Trial Court.


10.       Accordingly, the present applications are allowed in the above
          terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct
          service is permitted. Registry is directed to place a copy of
          this order in connected matters.


                                                                                                (GITA GOPI,J)
          Maulik
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MAULIK RAJESH PANDYA(HC00205), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 13/03/2026 16:18:13

                                                     Page 3 of 3