BHARATKUMAR BHAGUBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH
- Bench
- GITA GOPI
Holding
The conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are quashed and set aside due to the amicable settlement and compounding of the offence.
Summary
The applicant filed a criminal revision seeking to set aside a conviction and sentence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, originally imposed on 13 January 2023 and affirmed on appeal on 31 January 2026. The parties later reached an amicable settlement, with the complainant receiving the full cheque amount and consenting to compound the offence. The court examined the provisions of Section 147 of the NI Act, which allows compounding with the aggrieved's consent, and noted that it is subject to the overriding effect of Section 320(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code as interpreted in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Baba Lal. Finding that the dispute was resolved and the offence fully compensated, the court quashed the conviction and set aside the sentence. The revision application was therefore disposed in favour of the applicant.
Issues considered
- Whether a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be set aside on the basis of an amicable settlement and compounding of the offence under Section 147.
- Whether the consent of the aggrieved party under Section 147 overrides the conviction despite the provisions of Section 320(1) CrPC.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 320(1)
- Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881s. 138, s. 147
Subjects
Judgment
R/CR.RA/561/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 561 of 2026
==========================================================
BHARATKUMAR BHAGUBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SAADMAN A PIRZADA(10870) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JYOTI BHATT APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 23/03/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Deshal Modi appears for
respondent No.2 and seeks permission to le Vakalatnama.
Permission is granted. O ice to accept the same.
2. Rule. Learned advocates waive service of notice on
behalf of respondent parties. Rule is xed forthwith.
3. By way of this application, the applicant – revisionist
challenges the judgment of conviction and sentence dated
13.01.2023 passed by the learned 23 rd Additional Chief
Additional Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in Criminal Case
No.20027 of 2020 under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881. The above sentence was challenged by
way of an Appeal and the same was con rmed on 31.01.2026
by the learned 11th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara in
Page 1 of 3
R/CR.RA/561/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
Criminal Appeal No.78 of 2023.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Saadman A.Pirzada for the
applicant – revisionist stated that the matter has been
amicably settled between the parties.
5. The a idavit of the respondent No.2 - Alpesh
Bharatkumar Dave, original complainant is on record. The
original complainant is present before this Court, who has
been identi ed by learned advocate Mr. Deshal Modi. The
original complainant states and a irms that the the matter
has been settled between the parties amicably. The
complainant stated that the he has received the total amount
of cheque and thus, stated that necessary order may be
passed and the complainant does not want to pursue the
matter now in view of amicable settlement and has given
consent for compounding the o ence.
6. Since the complainant has given consent for
compounding the o ence, keeping in mind the object of
Section 147 of the NI Act, which is an enabling provision
which provides for compounding the o ence and may require
the consent of the aggrieved for compounding the o ence,
however, the speci c provision under Section 147, inserted by
way of amendment towards special law, would give overriding
e ect to sub-section (1) of Section 320 Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 (CrPC) 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
Page 2 of 3
R/CR.RA/561/2026 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026
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
compounded.
7. In aforesaid view of the matter, the judgment and order
passed by the learned Trial Court of conviction and sentence
for the o ence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act, as
a irmed by the learned Appellate Court, are quashed and set
aside.
8. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of
in the above terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent. Direct service is permitted.
(GITA GOPI,J)
Pankaj/52
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 23/03/2026 15:47:26
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.