Jayesh Jayantilal Maniyar vs Aarjil Enterprise & Anr

Hasmukh D. Suthar, J

1) By way of present revision application under Sections 397 read with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 30.10.2010 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surendranagar in Criminal Case No.209 of 2002, whereby, the trial Court has been pleased to hold the applicant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which shall hereinafter be referred to as "NI Act" for short) and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and also directed to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month. The said order was assailed by way of filing Criminal Appeal No.53 of 2010, wherein, vide order dated 27.07.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surendranagar, the appeal came to be partly allowed by reducing the simple imprisonment to only six months and rest of the order remained the same. Hence, the present Revision Application is filed by the applicant.

2) Learned Advocate for the applicant has submitted that during the pendency of the present revision application the applicant has deposited the cheque amount by way of Demand Draft dated 18.04.2026, of IDFC First Bank, Gandhinagar Branch. In view of above once the amount being deposited and the offence under Section 138 of the NI Act is quasi-criminal in character and is compoundable and punishment under the NI Act is not a means of seeking retribution but is more a means to ensure payment of money and to promote credibility of cheques as a trustworthy substitute for cash payment, in absence of any perversity no ground is found to upset the concurrent findings of the learned trial Court and Appellate Court and it is not open for Revisional Court to re-analyse and re-interpret the evidence in revisional jurisdiction. No case is made out to interfere with the reasons assigned by both the Courts.

3) At the same time this Court has taken into consideration the object of the Act and as the accused has made the payment, hence, in view of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court Sanjabij Tari Vs Kishore S. Borcar, Neutral Citation 2025 INSC 1158, maintaining the conviction this Court is inclined to extend the benefit under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, to the applicant-accused.

4) Accordingly, the applicant - accused is directed to be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, upon execution of probation bond in sum of Rs.20,000/-, with one surety of like amount for a period of six (6) months.

5) It is hereby further directed that the applicant - accused shall receive the sentence as and when called upon till the said period and the applicant shall maintain peace during above mentioned period of six (6) months.

6) The above mentioned bond under Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, be submitted before the learned trial Court within 15 days of passing of this judgment.

7) Accordingly, present revision application is disposed of. Record and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned Court forthwith.

8) The Registry is directed to release the deposited amount in favour of the complainant after due and proper verification.