Mr. Hiren Devendraprasad Shukla – authorized O:cer of & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Learned advocate Mr.M.H. Sayani appears and submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 - complainant. He is permitted to (cid:29)le his appearance. Registry shall accept his vakalatnama.

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 judgment and order of conviction dated 16.07.2025 passed by the learned 10th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (Spl. N.I. Court), Rajkot, in Criminal Case No.13744 of 2023, for the o4ence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.

Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant- R/CR.MA/21163/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025

Mr. Hiren Devendraprasad Shukla – authorized O:cer of the respondent No.2-Bank, who is personally present before this Court, has produced his identity proof as well as the a:davit, which are ordered to be taken on record. In the said a:davit, the complainant has categorically stated that the Bank has received the amount of Rs.16,75,000/- towards full and (cid:29)nal settlement of the outstanding dues of the loan and the dispute has been amicably resolved now. The complainant has further stated that he has no grievance or ill-will against the applicant.

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 learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for (cid:29)nal disposal.

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. M.H. Sayani waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 – complainant.

The complainant, who is personally present in the Court, has categorically stated before this Court that the Bank has received the amount of Rs.16,75,000/- towards full and (cid:29)nal settlement of the outstanding dues of the loan and for the said transaction, Bank has already issued a No Objection Certi(cid:29)cate dated 16th Sept, 2025, which annexed at Annexure-’B’ colly, to the application. Since the dispute has been resolved, the complainant has no objection if the application is allowed and R/CR.MA/21163/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 the impugned order is quashed and set-aside.

The relevant paragraphs of the a:davit (cid:29)led by the complainant read thus : “ 2. HDFC Bank had instituted Criminal Case No.13744 of 2023 before the learned JMFC, Rajkot under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. In the said proceedings, the present applicant came to be convicted.

3. The cheque involved in the aforesaid proceedings pertains to Loan Account No.122027109. The Bank and the present petitioner subsequently entered into a settlement, under which the Bank agreed to accept a sum of Rs.16,75,000/- towards full and 6nal settlement of the outstanding dues of the loan. The said amount has been duly received by the Bank and no further amount remains outstanding”.

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

Having heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and also taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) R/CR.MA/21163/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31, Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 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 criminal proceedings in relation to the impugned FIR against the applicants-accused would be an unnecessary harassment to the applicants- accused. It further appears that the trial would be a futile exercise and further continuing with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned FIR would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned FIR and said criminal case and all other consequential proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

In the result, the application is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction dated 16.07.2025 passed by the learned 10th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, (Spl. N.I. Court), Rajkot, in Criminal Case No.13744 of 2023, for the o4ence 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.

Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted. R/CR.MA/21163/2025 ORDER DATED: 08/12/2025

In view of the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Borcar [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, Rajkot, within a period of 2 weeks from the date of this order. (VIMAL K. VYAS, J) Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.