HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Click here to view full judgement.
S. Ravindra Bhat, J. -
(1.) The petitioner seeks an order under section 482, Cr. P.C. to quash the criminal proceeding initiated by an First Information Report. It was alleged by the second respondent/informant that the petitioners were guilty of offences under sections 420/468/471/34, I.P.C. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon a compromise deed executed by the second respondent and the petitioners which recorded that the dispute which was subject matter of the F.I.R. were settled. It was also submitted that the dispute with the bank so far as the issuance of cheque was concerned stood settled.
(2.) The complainant/ second respondent is present in the Court. He was identified by Counsel for the petitioner. He produced a Voter Identify Card, which was scrutinised by Counsel for the respondent State. It is stated that the said respondent concurs with the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners. In view of the submissions and the statement of the second respondent, I am of the opinion that interest of justice lie in quashin the proceedings. Accordingly F.I.R. No. 106/2005 P.S. : M.S. Park and all further proceedings are hereby quashed.
(3.) The petitions are allowed in the above terms. Order Dasti.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.