SHARDABEN CHANDUBHAI PRAJAPATI, PROPRIETOR C. G. CHEMICALS vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
- Case type
- CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION
- Decided on
- 16-03-2026
R/CR.RA/1460/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ACQUITTAL -
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT ACT) NO. 1460 of 2019
With
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1461 of 2019
With
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 1462 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
SHARDABEN CHANDUBHAI PRAJAPATI, PROPRIETOR C. G. CHEMICALS
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AABID PATHAN for MR VIRAL M PANDYA(5257) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 16/03/2026
COMMON JUDGMENT
[1.0] By way of present criminal revision applications under Section
397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(for short “CrPC”), the applicant – original complainant has assailed
the judgment and orders passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeals whereby the
conviction of the original accused as awarded by the learned
Metropolitan Magistrate in proceedings under the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881 has been upheld however sentence is reduced
to “till rising of the Court” and fine of Rs.10,000/- is imposed and by
way of compensation, the original accused is directed to pay Rs.2500/-
with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of dishonor
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 13:17:49 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/1460/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
of cheque till the accused deposited the amount of cheque.
[2.0] The details of criminal revision application alongwith
corresponding judgment and order under challenge are as under:
Criminal
Revision
Application
Criminal Appeal No.
Criminal Case No.
with Date of order
with
Date of J/T and order by
passed by learned
Appeal No.
learned Appellate Court
Magistrate
1460/2019 504/2015
06.07.2019
803/2011
30.11.2015
1461/2019 505/2015
06.07.2019
828/2011
30.11.2015
1462/2019 506/2015
06.07.2019
829/2011
30.11.2015
[3.0] As per the case of the present applicant – original complainant,
in connection of dishonor of cheque, criminal case for the offence
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 came to be
filed before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad
wherein the learned Magistrate has been pleased to pass an order of
conviction and sentence against the respondent No.2 – original
accused and directed the original accused to serve simple
imprisonment for one year and ordered to pay fine of Rs.3500/- and in
case of default in payment of fine, further two months’ simple
imprisonment is imposed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied, original
accused preferred Criminal Appeal before the learned appellate Court
wherein the learned appellate Court has taken into consideration the
fact that during the pendency of appeal, accused have deposited the
amount of cheque before the appellate Court and said amount is lying
with the appellate Court. As the learned trial Court has not passed any
order of compensation, taking into consideration the order passed by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Meters and
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 13:17:49 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/1460/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
Instruments Private Limited vs. Kanchan Mehta rendered in
Criminal Appeal No.1731/2017 , as no order of compensation has
been passed and said order is not assailed by the original complainant,
keeping in mind the aforesaid conduct on the part of the accused, as
he has deposited the amount towards compensation during the
pendency of appeal, learned appellate Court has been pleased to pass
an order to pay 6% interest on the disputed cheque amount within 15
days and also directed the accused to pay Rs.2500/- towards cost to
the present applicant – original complainant and further ordered that
whatever amount is lying with the Court same be paid to the original
complainant and sentence is reduced to till rising of the Court and
order of sentence came to be modified.
[4.0] Heard learned advocate for the applicant – original complainant
and learned APP for the respondent – State of Gujarat.
[5.0] Learned advocate Mr. Aabid Pathan for learned advocate Mr.
V.M. Pandya appearing for the applicant – original complainant has
submitted that the appellate Court has committed an error and the
accused have till date not deposited the amount of compensation at
the rate of 6% interest before the Court and hence, the applicant –
original complainant has filed the present revision applications.
[6.0] It is needless to say that the amount was deposited during the
pendency of appeal and therefore, in view of decision in the case of
M/s. Meters & Instruments Private Limited (Supra) and more
particularly when the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is a
quasi criminal in character and is also compoundable one, the
punishment under the NI Act is not a means of seeking retribution but
is a more means to ensure payment of money and to promote
credibility of cheques as a trustworthy substitute for cash payment
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 13:17:49 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/1460/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 16/03/2026
and considering the said aspect, learned appellate Court has not
committed any error in modifying the order of sentence more
particularly in light of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of Sanjabij Tari vs. Kishore S Boarcar & Anr. reported in 2025
INSC 1158.
[7.0] Learned advocate for the applicant has mainly raised a
grievance about the recovery of amount of compensation. It is
needless to say that if any amount is yet to be recovered under the
order then the remedy is different rather than preferring a revision
application. The Code of Criminal Procedure / Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita provides mechanism with regard to recovery of the
payment of amount or fine imposed by the Court and it is always open
for the applicant – original complainant to recover the said amount
but only with a view to get execute the order, revision application is
not maintainable.
[8.0] In view of above, no case is made out to interfere with the
judgment and order passed by the learned appellate Court and hence,
present revision applications stand disposed of . However, it is kept
open for the applicant – original complainant – revisionist to file
appropriate proceeding before appropriate forum, if so advised, to
recover the dues yet to be recovered from the accused under the
impugned judgment and order towards compensation and such
proceeding be decided independently without being influenced by any
of the observations made in this judgment on its own merits. Notice in
each of the revision applications stand discharged.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by MR. AJAY C MENON(HC00939) on Tue Mar 17 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Mar 17 13:17:49 IST 2026