Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. Abhiraj R Trivedi(5576) No. 1
  • Mr. P.P. Majmudar(5284) No. 2
Judges
  • Sonia Gokani, J.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
  • Mr. Abhiraj R Trivedi(5576) No. 1
  • Mr. P.P. Majmudar(5284) No. 2
Judges
  • Sonia Gokani, J.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

This opinion addresses the appeals arising from multiple criminal cases involving the respondent accused Rohitbhai J. Patel. The appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 9.6.2017 passed by the learned 8th Additional Senior Civil Judge & Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara. The court’s final order was pronounced on 08/01/2018, resulting in the quashing and setting aside of the prior judgment and conviction of the respondent under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in each case.

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether the judgment and order dated 9.6.2017 in the specified criminal cases should be quashed and set aside.
  2. Whether the respondent Rohitbhai J. Patel is liable to be convicted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in each case.
  3. What sentence, fine, compensation, and punishment in default should be imposed on the respondent for each criminal case.
  4. The procedural requirement for the respondent’s surrender and enforcement of the imprisonment awarded.

Arguments of the Parties

The opinion does not contain a detailed account of the parties' legal arguments.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court reviewed the prior judgment and found it necessary to quash and set aside the earlier order of conviction. It convicted the respondent Rohitbhai J. Patel under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for each criminal case. The court imposed a uniform sentence of one year simple imprisonment along with a fine amounting to double the amount of the cheque involved in each case. The court further ordered that a specified portion of the fine be paid as compensation to the appellants via an Account Payee Cheque. Failure to pay the fine would result in an additional one year of rigorous imprisonment. The court also mandated the respondent to surrender within six weeks, authorizing the trial court to issue a non-bailable warrant if the respondent fails to comply.

Holding and Implications

DISPOSED OF: All the appeals are allowed. The previous judgment and order dated 9.6.2017 are quashed and set aside. The respondent Rohitbhai J. Patel is convicted under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in each case and sentenced to one year simple imprisonment with a fine double the cheque amount. Compensation must be paid to the appellants, and failure to pay the fine will lead to an additional year of rigorous imprisonment. The respondent must surrender within six weeks or face issuance of a non-bailable warrant.

The decision directly affects the parties by altering the prior convictions and imposing specified sentences and fines. No new legal precedent was established by this order.

Show full summary ...
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    Shashi Mohan Goyanka v. State Of Gujarat

    Date : 08/01/2018 FARAD For the reasons recorded in the oral judgment dictated and pronounced today in the open Court, the Hon'ble Court has passed the following final order: (A) Resultantly, all the appeals are allowed. The Judgment and order dated 9.6.2017 passed by the learned 8th Additional Senior Civil Judge & Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in New Criminal Case Nos.44345/2009,46499/2008,48420/2008,40321/ 2008,48631/2008,46503/2008 are quashed and set aside and the respondent accused Rohitbhai J.Patel, respondent of Vadodara is hereby convicted for the offence punishable under section 138 of the n.i.act in each case. R/CR.A/1187/2017 FARAD (B) Individually, in every appeal, arising from a separate criminal case, the amount of fine and payment of compensation so also the punishment in default of payment shall be as under: R/CR.A/1187/2017 FARAD Criminal Appeal Criminal Case No. Award of sentence Amount of fine Compens ation awarded from fine to accused Punishme nt in default Criminal Appeal No.1187/ 2017 44345/2009

    1 year simple imprison ment Rs.6,00, 000/ (Double the Amount cheque ) lakhs

    1 year simple impriso nment Criminal Appeal No.1191/ 2017 46499/2008

    1 year simple imprison ment Rs.6,00, 000/ (Double the Amount cheque ) lakhs

    1 year simple impriso nment Criminal Appeal No.1192/ 2017 46254/2008

    1 year simple imprison ment Rs.6,00, 000/ (Double the Amount cheque ) lakhs

    1 year simple impriso nment Criminal Appeal No.1193/ 2017 48420/2008

    1 year simple imprison ment Rs.6,00, 000/ (Double the Amount cheque ) lakhs

    1 year simple impriso nment Criminal Appeal No.1194/ 2017 40321/2008

    1 year simple imprison ment Rs.6,00, 000/ (Double the Amount cheque ) lakhs

    1 year simple impriso nment Criminal Appeal No.1195/ 2017 48631/2008

    1 year simple imprison ment Rs.6,00, 000/ (Double the Amount cheque ) lakhs

    1 year simple impriso nment R/CR.A/1187/2017 FARAD Criminal Appeal No.1196/ 2017 46503/2008

    1 year simple imprison ment Rs.6,00, 000/ (Double the Amount cheque ) lakhs

    1 year simple impriso nment (C) Thus, in each case, he shall undergo simple imprisonment for the period of one year and shall pay, in each Criminal Appeal, by way of fine the amount, which shall be double the amount of the cheque as detailed hereinabove. Out of the said amount of fine, in every Criminal Appeal, amount specified in column No.6 shall be paid to the appellant by way of an Account Payee Cheque. If not paid, he shall further undergo one year of rigorous imprisonment in default. (D) Respondent No.2 shall surrender himself on expiry of the period of 6 weeks' period i.e. on or before 22.2.2018. If he does not surrender within the stipulated time period, the trial Court concerned shall issue nonbailable warrant to ensure that he undergoes the imprisonment awarded in each case. Direct service is permitted. (EZHUTHASSAN SUDHIR ACHUTHAN) PPS/PS

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.
    Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

    Comments

    Shashi Mohan Goyanka v. State Of Gujarat
    (Jan 8, 2018)