HEMALBHAI DEVCHANDBHAI KHATRI v. STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

Learned advocate Mr. Vishvesh R. Acharya appears and submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 – original complainant. Registry shall accept his vakalatnama.

3. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the impugned judgment and order dated 29.11.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, in R/CR.MA/200/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026 Criminal Appeal No. 536 of 2024 as well as the order dated

24.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Case No.15579 of 2018 for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.

4. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant, who is personally present before this Court, has produced his identity proof as well as submitted an affidavit, which are ordered to be taken on record. In the said affidavit, the complainant has categorically stated that he has no grievance against the applicant as he has already received his dues. He has further stated that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties and there is no ill-will or any grievance amongst them.

5. Considering the issue involved in the present application as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for final disposal.

6. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Manan Maheta waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 – State and learned advocate Mr. Vishvesh R. Acharya waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the R/CR.MA/200/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026 respondent no.2 – complainant.

7. The complainant, who is personally present in the Court, has categorically stated before this Court that he has no objection if the application is allowed and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.11.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 536 of 2024 as well as the order dated 24.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Case No.15579 of 2018 are quashed and set-aside.

8. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law.

9. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the complainant – Dilipbhai Bharatbhai Rathod, read thus : “3. After passing of the judgement by the Ld. Session Judge, the matter has been amicably settle between the parties and the petitioner herein has paid the amount as per the order of Ld. Trial Court by way of Deed of settlement dated 30/12/2025 to the complainant herein. And therefore, the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.

4. The complainant herein has no objection, if this Hon'ble court will quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 29/11/2025 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad, wherein he has confirmed the order of the Learned Magistrate by a judgment and order dated 24/07/2023.” R/CR.MA/200/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026

10. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 31, Manoj Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 190, and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as well as State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it appears that continuing further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned order of conviction and sentence would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned conviction and sentence and all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of the powers conferred 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

11. In the result, the application is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 29.11.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 536 of 2024 as well as the order dated 24.07.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad, in Criminal Case R/CR.MA/200/2026 ORDER DATED: 07/01/2026 No.15579 of 2018, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside qua the applicant/s.

12. In view of the ratio laid down in the case of Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Borcar and Another [2025 INSC 1158], the applicant is directed to deposit 7.5% of the cheque amount, by way of costs, with the District Legal Service Authority, Ahmedabad, within a period of two weeks from the date of this order.

13. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted. AMAR SINGH (VIMAL K. VYAS, J) Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.