BRIJESHKUMAR RAJENDRABHAI MISTRY Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this revision application at the instance of the applicant - accused is given to the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below of conviction and sentence for the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act ).

(2.) Rule. Learned advocates for the respective respondents waive service.

(3.) Learned advocate for the applicant states that total cheque amount has been paid to the complainant and the complainant has no grievance now. Respondent No. 2 - Harshaben Rajeshbhai Bagadiya - original complainant is present before the Court and is identified by learned advocate Mr. Vasim Raja A. Kureshi, who will be filing his appearance before the registry, which may be accepted. The learned advocate for the respondent No. 2 - original complainant requested to allow the complainant to address the Court by video conferencing as, due to ill health, she could not climb the stairs, however, she has come to the Court and is at the ground floor. The Court, therefore, permitted the learned advocate for the complainant to make arrangement through his mobile device so that the complainant gives the affirmation of the affidavit, filed by her, which is taken on record, by way of video conferencing. Complainant - respondent No. 2 - Harshaben Rajeshbhai Bagadiya addressed the Court through video conferencing to state that she has received the total cheque amount and the complainant does not want to pursue the matter now in view of amicable settlement and has given consent for compounding the offence.