S.P. Pathak, J. - (1.) BY filing this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed to quash the orders dated 9.7.2009 and 3.4.2010 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Junior Division) cum Judicial Magistrate No. 11, Jaipur city, Jaipur whereby cognizance against the accused petitioners under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471/120B IPC was taken and further to quash the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No. 3/2009.
(2.) THE facts for the disposal of the present petition are that non -petitioner No. 2 filed a complaint against the petitioners alleging various allegations against them that inspite of making payment of commercial space at Plot No. 2, Jagatpura Road, Near Jawahar Circle, Jaipur, they have not delivered the possession of the property in question and cheated. The complaint was sent under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. for investigation to the police station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur. The police after investigation submitted final report considering the matter to be of civil nature. Thereafter, protest petition was filed and the learned Magistrate after recording statement of the complainant took cognizance in the matter vide order dated 9.7.2009 and petitioners were summoned through bailable warrants. It has been the contention of the learned Counsel that in the instant case no cheating what -so -ever was done and the petitioners are still prepared to provide and hand over the possession subject to payment of the balance money. It is also contended that they are also prepared to pay the money deposited by the non -petitioner No. 2 with them and in that regard already a cheque has been submitted before the State Consumer Forum and that is lying there. It is also contended that now the complainant who is an advocate has filed an affidavit in this petition wherein he has agreed to withdraw the complaint but he wants the money which has been deposited by him with the petitioners, therefore, the petitioner company has also agreed to the terms and conditions stated by the non -petitioner in his affidavit regarding refund of the amount.
(3.) ON the other hand, non -petitioner No. 2 has filed affidavit dated 28.7.2010 duly attested which is available on the file. Non -petitioner No. 2, who is an advocate, is present in person and submits that he is no more interested to pursue the criminal proceedings pending in the court against the petitioners as the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.;