Dismissed

Shaktisinh Juvansinh Vaghela v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC5 Jul 2019CR.MA/21132/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC after finding that the applicant issued cheques to the complainant which were subsequently dishonoured. The application, initially withdrawn by the applicant following the court's reluctance to entertain it, was finally dismissed with costs of Rs.15,000.

What did the court decide?

The application was dismissed with a cost of Rs.15,000/- to be deposited with the Registry.

Shaktisinh Juvansinh Vaghela Vs State of Gujarat — Cheque Dishonour | Gujarat HC (2019)

¶1

R/CR.MA/21132/2018 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION NO. 21132 of 2018

¶4

=======================================================

¶5

SHAKTISINH JUVANSINH VAGHELA

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

=======================================================

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

MR SIKANDER SAIYED(3458) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARSH M SURTI(3907) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR LB DABHI APP(2) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
URVESH M PRAJAPATI(8878) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶11

=======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

¶13

Date : 05/07/2019

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

01This application is filed under Section 438 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

¶16

02It is required to be noted that the concerned
advocate, who was appearing for the applicant,
under the instruction, submitted on 01.04.2019
that the matter is likely to be settled and,
therefore, the applicant has handed over the
cheques to the complainant. Thus in view of the
said statement, this Court has granted protection
by an order dated 01.04.2019, which reads as
under,

¶17

“It is contended that matter is likely to
be settled. The applicant has handed over
the cheques to the complainant. Learned
advocate for the complainant has confirmed
the said settlement. However, the said
cheques are till date not cleared. In view
of the aforesaid development which has

¶18

Page 1 of 3

¶19

R/CR.MA/21132/2018 ORDER

¶20

taken place during the pendency of this
application, till next date of hearing,
the applicant shall not be arrested. Stand
over to 16.4.2019.”

¶21

03Thereafter the cheques issued by the applicant in
favour of the complainant were dishonoured. In
fact, the declaration-cum-affidavit was filed by
the applicant before this Court, wherein the
applicant has assured that the applicant will
handover the cheques to the complainant, however,
the said cheques were dishonoured as observed
hereinabove.

¶22

04 Thereafter, further time was asked by the concerned advocate for the applicant.

¶23

05The applicant has thereafter changed his advocate
and new advocate appearing before this Court on
his behalf has also once against assured under the
instruction that the applicant will handover
cheques to the complainant and ultimately on
25.06.2019, this Court has passed following order,

¶24

“Learned advocate appearing for the
applicant submits that the applicant is
ready and willing to hand over the cheques
dated1.7.2019and20.8.2019of
Rs.10,00,000/- each to the learned
advocate for the complainant to be handed
over, in turn, to the original
complainant. Stand over to 5.7.2019.
Interim relief granted earlier to continue
till then.”

¶25

06Today, when the matter is called out, learned
advocate appearing for the original complainant

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

R/CR.MA/21132/2018 ORDER

¶28

has placed on record return memo received from the
bank and submitted that cheque dated 01.07.2019
given by the applicant is dishonoured.

¶29

07In view of the aforesaid conduct, this Court is
not inclined to entertain this application. At
this stage, learned advocate, Mr. Kajal Shingadiya
for learned advocate, Mr. Sikander Saiyed, under
the instruction, has requested that the applicant
may be permitted to withdraw this application.

¶30

08However in view of the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the present case, the present
application is dismissed with cost of Rs.15,000/-.
Rule is discharged. Interim relief stands vacated.
The applicant shall deposit the amount of cost of
Rs.15,000/- before the Registry of this Court
within one month, which shall be handed over to
the legal aid committee.

¶31

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.)

¶32

Gautam

¶33

Page 3 of 3

Shaktisinh Juvansinh Vaghela v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaktisinh Juvansinh Vaghela v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay @ Bhaiya Ashokbhai Kulpati Vs State of Gujarat

Babubhai Sanklabhai Parmar(Garasiya) Vs State of Gujarat

Prakashbhai Ramabhai Patni Vs State of Gujarat

Amthabhai Ramabhai Chaudhari Vs State of Gujarat

Baljeetsingh Satnamsingh Jaat Vs State of Gujarat

Sipai Rahim @ Rahli Rustambhai Nathubhai Vs State of Gujarat