RAKESH RANJAN PRASAD, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State and also learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2.
(2.) A complaint bearing no.1650 of 2009 was filed by the complainant against the petitioner on the allegation that in spite of supply of the materials payments were not made to him. On such complaint, cognizance of the offence under Ss. 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code was taken, vide order dated 1.2.2010 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Ranchi. That order has been challenged in this application filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of this application good sense prevailed upon the parties who got their dispute settled whereby the amount which was agreed to be paid has already been paid and thereby they arrived at a compromise and hence, a joint compromise petition has been filed in this Court and therefore, the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance be quashed, in view of the ratia laid down in a case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab [ : (2008) 4 SCC 582].;