SANGITA TOBACCO INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the matter is called out for hearing, respondent No.2 - original complainant Shri Nirmalbhai Rameshbhai Shah, Partner of Mangalam Finance is present along with his advocate Mr. Y.V. Brahmbhatt. Both the parties to the proceedings filed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, submit that the matter is settled between the parties and in support thereof, the respondent No.2 - original complainant files compromise pursis which is ordered to be taken on record.

(2.) The respondent No.2 - original complainant is present in the Court. He has been identified by learned advocate Mr. YV Brahmbhatt. The complainant in unequivocal terms stated before the Court that he has received the amount of cheque and now, no grievance is remaining. He does not want to proceed further in regards to the dispute of offence punishable u/s 138 of the N.I. Act. He further submits that if the petitioner accused is acquitted upon the compromise between the parties, he has whatsoever no objection. Sec. 147 of the NI Act permits the party to enter into compromise at every stage of the litigation. This has been recognized by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Damodar S. Prabhu V/s. Sayed Babalal H. reported in AIR 2010 SC 1907. The complainant is also compounding the offence.

(3.) After verifying voluntary character of the compromise, it is hereby declared that the compromise arrived at between the parties to this litigation out of the Court is accepted as genuine and the order of conviction and sentence dtd. 18/10/2008 passed by the learned JMFC, Anand in Criminal Case No.3019 of 2007 and confirmed vide order dtd. 26/3/2012 passed by the learned 2nd Ad hoc Additional District Judge, Anand in Criminal Appeal No.32 of 2008 both are required to be quashed and set aside as this Court intends to secure ends of justice as provided under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.