SINGADIYA SANJAYBHAI RAMNIKBHAI vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
R/SCR.A/2735/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/10/2026
(GJHC240100342026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 2735 of 2026
With
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2736 of 2026
With
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2749 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
SINGADIYA SANJAYBHAI RAMNIKBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KAVAN K PATEL(11303) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR VIVEK V BHAMARE(6710) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. JAY MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
SIDDHARTH G PATEL(8880) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
URVESH M PRAJAPATI(8878) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 21/10/2026
JUDGMENT
1. Since the issue raised in these applications are similar,
they are being decided by a common judgment. The
facts of Special Criminal Application No. 2735 Of 2026
are taken for the purpose of adjudication.
Page 1 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Thu Oct 22 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 04:07:46 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/2735/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/10/2026
(GJHC240100342026)
2. This application is filed seeking the following reliefs:—
“A. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to allow the present
application and be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated
09.01.2026 passed below Exh - 4 in Criminal Appeal No.10 of
2026 passed by the learned Sessions Court, Gandhinagar directing
the Applicant to deposit the entire cheque amount of
Rs.20,00,000/- within 60 days as a condition for suspension of
sentence (at ANNEXURE-A hereto);
B. During pendency and final disposal of present petition, YOUR
LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the operation, implementation
and execution of the condition directing deposit of Rs.20,00,000/-
i.e the entire cheque amount within 60 days by passing order
dated 09.01.2026 below Exh 4 in Criminal Appeal No. 10 of 2026
at ANNEXURE – ; А
C. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to modify the impugned
order by substituting the said harsh condition with reasonable and
lenient conditions as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of
justice;
D. Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought
just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present
case.”
3. Heard learned advocate Mr. Kavan Patel for the
petitioner, learned APP Mr. Jay Mehta for the respondent
– State and learned advocate Mr. Urvesh Prajapati for
the respondent No. 2.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Patel for the petitioner submitted
Page 2 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Thu Oct 22 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 04:07:46 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/2735/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/10/2026
(GJHC240100342026)
that the petitioner was convicted for the offence
punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, whereby he was sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of one year and was
further directed to pay an amount equivalent to 100% of
the cheque amount. Learned advocate for the petitioner
submitted that the petitioner was convicted for the
offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, whereby he was sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of one year and was
further directed to pay an amount equivalent to 100% of
the cheque amount. Learned advocate for the petitioner
submitted that, while directing the petitioner to deposit
100% of the cheque amount, the learned Appellate Court
has not assigned any special or cogent reasons for
imposing such condition. It is submitted that the
petitioner has preferred an appeal challenging the
judgment and order of conviction and, if the entire
cheque amount is required to be deposited as a
condition for suspension of sentence, the statutory right
of appeal would be rendered illusory. It is further
submitted that the right of appeal is a statutory right
Page 3 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Thu Oct 22 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 04:07:46 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/2735/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/10/2026
(GJHC240100342026)
which the petitioner seeks to avail and, therefore, the
onerous and unreasonable condition imposed by the
learned Appellate Court deserves to be quashed and set
aside.
5. Learned advocate Mr. Prajapati, appearing for the
respondent, submitted that, upon consideration of the
Rojkam, the learned Court has noticed that the
petitioner had neither remained present before the
learned Magistrate nor regularly remained present
before the learned Appellate Court. It is further
submitted that even the advocate appearing for the
petitioner had filed a retirement pursis. In view of the
aforesaid conduct of the petitioner, it is submitted that
the learned Appellate Court was justified in imposing the
condition of deposit of 100% of the cheque amount. It is,
therefore, submitted that no interference is warranted
and the present application deserves to be dismissed.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the
learned advocates for the respective parties and having
perused the material available on record, it emerges
that, while convicting the petitioner, the learned
Page 4 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Thu Oct 22 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 04:07:46 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/2735/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/10/2026
(GJHC240100342026)
Magistrate has sentenced him to undergo simple
imprisonment for a period of one year and has further
directed him to pay compensation equivalent to the
cheque amount. It is submitted that three separate
cheques were issued, in respect of which separate
complaints have been filed, and that similar orders have
been passed in all the complaints. It also appears from
the record that the learned Appellate Court has not
assigned any special or cogent reasons for imposing the
condition requiring the petitioner to deposit the entire
cheque amount. In the opinion of this Court, a condition
which is onerous and incapable of being complied with
ought not to be imposed mechanically. While imposing
conditions for suspension of sentence, the learned
Appellate Court is required to consider the facts and
circumstances of the case, including the financial
condition of the petitioner and the fact that the appeal
has been preferred challenging the judgment and order
of conviction for the offence punishable under Section
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
6.1. Additionally, when the petitioner has challenged the
judgment and order of conviction by preferring an
Page 5 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Thu Oct 22 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 04:07:46 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/2735/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/10/2026
(GJHC240100342026)
appeal, instead of imposing a condition requiring deposit
of the entire cheque amount, the learned Appellate
Court could have imposed a condition requiring deposit
of an appropriate percentage of the cheque amount,
having regard to the requirement contemplated under
Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
6.2. As regards the submission that the petitioner has
remained absent before the learned Magistrate as well
as the learned Appellate Court, the said concern can be
addressed by imposing an appropriate condition to
secure the presence of the petitioner before the learned
Appellate Court.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the
impugned order dated 09.01.2026 by the learned
Sessions Court, Gandhinagar in Criminal Appeal Nos. 10
of 2026, 12 of 2026 and 11 of 2026 deserves to be
quashed and set aside, subject to the following
directions:—
7.1. The petitioner shall file an undertaking before the
learned Appellate Court to remain present on each and
every date of hearing fixed by the learned Appellate
Page 6 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Thu Oct 22 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 04:07:46 IST 2026
R/SCR.A/2735/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 21/10/2026
(GJHC240100342026)
Court, irrespective of the presence or absence of the
advocate appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner
shall deposit 20% of the cheque amount before the
learned Appellate Court within a period of four weeks
from today.
7.2. The petitioner shall also file an undertaking before
the learned Appellate Court, within a period of one week
from today, stating that he shall comply with the
aforesaid conditions.
7.3. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and
subject to the aforesaid conditions, the present
application is allowed. The impugned order is
accordingly quashed and set aside.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
NIVYA A. NAIR
Page 7 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Thu Oct 22 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 04:07:46 IST 2026