Oral Order

1. Learned advocate Mr. Gaurang A. Vaghela appears and submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 - original complainant. Registry shall accept his vakalatnama.

2. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicants-accused seek to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the judgment and order dated 15.11.2025 passed by the learned 3 rd Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural), in Criminal Case No. 7990 of 2023, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.

3. Today, when the matter is called out, the authorized signatory of the complainant company is personally present before this Court. He has submitted the authority letter issued by the respondent no.2 / company as well as submitted an affidavit, which are ordered to be taken on record. In the said affidavit, the authorized signatory of the complainant company has categorically stated that they have no grievance against the applicants as the they have already received the dues. He has further stated that the dispute has been amicably resolved with the applicants and there is no ill-will or any grievance amongst them.

4. Considering the issue involved in the present application as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties, with the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for final disposal.

5. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Ms. Asmita Patel waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 - State and learned advocate Mr. Gaurang A. Vaghela waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 - complainant.

6. The authorized signatory of the complainant company, who is personally present in the Court, has categorically stated before this Court that he has no objection if the application is allowed and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 15.11.2025 passed by the learned 3 rd Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural), in Criminal Case No. 7990 of 2023, is quashed and set-aside.

7. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law.

8. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the authorized signatory of the complainant company, namely, Mr. Vasimbhai Mansuri, read thus :

          "1. I am the Res. No. 2 in the above captioned application and I am the original complainant who had filed Criminal Case No. 7990 of 2023 under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 before 3rd Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate First Class (Rural) at Navrangpura, Ahmedabad.

          2. I state that, due to intervention of the good mediators, the disputes between the parties have settled amicably and both the parties are agreed under the conclusions of the disputes because of the settlement took place and therefore now both the parties do not want to pursue any other litigation further. I have received Demand Draft Dt.19/01/2025 vide Demand Draft No. 681785 of IDFC First Bank for the total amount of Rs.25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakh only) as total cheque amount.

          3. Therefore, I have received total due amount from the present petitioners the accused. Therefore also, I have no grievance if the present petition filed by the present applicant allowed and order Dt.15/11/2025 passed by Ld. 3rd Addl. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Navrangpura in Criminal Case No. 7990 of 2023 been quashed and set aside."

9. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 31, Manoj Sharma vs. State & Others, reported in (2009) 1 GLH 190, and Narinder Singh & Others vs. State of Punjab & Another, reported in (2014) 2 Crime 67 (SC) as well as State of Haryana vs. Bhajanlal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604, it appears that continuing further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law. Hence, to secure the ends of justice, the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence and all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are required to be quashed and set-aside in exercise of the powers conferred 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

10. In the result, the application is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 15.11.2025 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural), in Criminal Case No. 7990 of 2023, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto are hereby ordered to be quashed and set-aside qua the applicants.

11. In view of the ratio laid down in the case of Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S. Borcar and Another [2025 INSC 1158], the applicants are directed to deposit 7.5% of the cheque amount, by way of costs with the District Legal Service Authority, Ahmedabad, within a period of two weeks from the date of this order.

12. Rule made absolute. Direct service is permitted.