Posted On by &filed under Gujarat High Court, High Court.


Gujarat High Court
Sattarbhai vs State on 21 March, 2011
Author: Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CR.RA/577/2007	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CRIMINAL
REVISION APPLICATION No. 577 of 2007
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

SATTARBHAI
GAFOORBHAI WHORA - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
NEHAL R JOSHI for
Applicant(s) : 1, 
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR
DS CHAUHAN for Respondent(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 04/10/2007 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Rule.

Learned APP Mr. Patel waives service of rule on behalf of the State,
learned advocate Mr. Chauhan waives for respondent No. 2.

2. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, with the consent of parties
this application is taken up for final hearing today.

3. Learned
advocate for the respondent Mr. Chauhan placed on record affidavit
dated 28.9.07 of one Mr. Jivanlal Ambalal Shah, a partner of M/s
Manilal Chunilal Shah a partnership firm. Affidavit is ordered to
be taken on record.

4. Learned
advocate for the parties states that the parties have compounded the
offence punishable under section 138 of N.I Act and the petitioner
has paid the amount of cheques to the complainant and the partner of
complainant has filed affidavit stating that outstanding amount
of the cheques has been received by him and the dispute is settled.

5. It
appears from the affidavit filed by Jivanlal Ambalal Shah that the
petitioner has paid the amount of four cheques which were the
subject matter of Criminal Case No. 220/02. The complainant has
received the amount. The affidavit has been executed before Notary
Public. The affidavit indicates that it was executed without undue
influence or coercion therefore, the affidavit is required to be
accepted.

6. In
view of the fact that the offence has been compounded the judgment
of conviction passed by the trial court and confirmed by the
Appellate Court is required to be set aside.

7.
In view of above, this revision application is allowed. The judgment
and order of conviction passed by learned JMFC Mahmemdabad dated
11.4.07 in criminal case No. 220/02 and confirmed by learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Nadiad on 31.8.07 in Criminal
Appeal NO. 23/07 is set aside and the petitioner is acquitted for
the offence charged against him. The petitioner is in jail and
therefore he is directed to set free if not required in any
offence. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service is
permitted.

(Bankim
N. Mehta,J)

mary//

   

Top


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

18 queries in 0.444 seconds.