In a landmark decision, the Gujarat High Court has quashed the conviction and sentence in a significant case involving Ramapir Harijan Majoor Bandhkam Sahkari Mandali Limited and Smt. Dhirajben Rameshchandra Katamal. This judgment marks a pivotal moment in the legal battle, setting a precedent for future cases. Justice has been served for all parties involved. #LegalJustice #HighCourt #QuashingJudgment
Facts
- Petitioner and Narendra Mehta were jointly accused in Criminal Case No.1469 of 1996 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
- Both accused were convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to one year of simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,25,000.
- Both accused were held jointly responsible for the offence.
- The complainant compounded the offence and settled with Narendra Mehta, resulting in the compounding of the entire offence.
- The disputed cheque was issued by the accused in their capacities as President and Secretary of a cooperative society.
- The cooperative society, Ramapir Harijan Majoor Bandhkam Sahkari Mandali Limited, was not accused but the accused were held vicariously liable.
- Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 applies due to the cooperative society being a body corporate.
- The judgments and sentences passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge were quashed and the petitioner was acquitted from all charges.
- The parties have jointly drawn a cheque from the account of Ramapir Harijan Majoor Bandhkam Sahkari Mandali Limited in favor of complainant Smt. Dhirajben Rameshchandra Katamal.
- The offense is compoundable and a settlement has been reached between the petitioner (original accused) and the complainant.
- A settlement deed dated 11.08.2021 states that the petitioner has paid Rs. 1,00,000 in cash as full and final settlement to the complainant.
- The settlement deed has been taken on record and acknowledged.
Analysis
- The impugned order contains a patent illegality
- The office bearers of Ramapir Harijan Majoor Bandhkam Sahkari Mandali Limited were implicated as accused without the Mandali itself being accused
- Arraigning only the office bearers without the Mandali is not legally sound
- The issue was raised before the learned Sessions Judge and answered against the accused.
- The Sessions Judge referred to the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Anil Hada vs Indian Acrylic Limited – AIR 2000 SC 145.
- However, the said judgment has been overruled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Aneeta Hada vs Godfather Travels and Tours (P) Limited – (2012) 5 SCC 661.
- The judgment in Aneeta Hada vs Godfather Travels and Tours (P) Limited has been consistently followed in various judgments.
- Patent illegality identified in the impugned judgment
- Revision deserved consideration given the illegality
- Direct impact on the validity of the judgment
Decision
- The revision is allowed by quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.12.2000.
- The petitioner has been acquitted from all charges leveled against him.
- The judgment and order dated 12.03.2003 confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge have been set aside.
- The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
- Record and proceedings, if called for, are to be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
- The Rule is made absolute to that extent.
Case Title: ARJANDAS RAMDAS SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
Case Number: R/CR.RA/245/2003
