IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.8101 of 1996 1. YOGENDRA NATH SINGH, son of late Sri Jainandan Singh (Managing Director), resident of Geetanjali Building Chauhatta, P.S. Hajipur, District Vaishali 2. Smt. Geeta Singh, wife of Sri Yogendra Nath Singh, (Director), resident of Geetanjali Building Chauhatta, P.S. Hajipur, District Vaishali 3. Manoj Kumar Singh, son of Sri Yogendra Nath Singh (Director), resident of Geetanjali Building, Chauhatta, P.S. Hajipur, District Vaishali ... Petitioners Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The Bihar State Financial Corporation, Frazer Road, Patna ... Opp.Parties ----------- 11. 7.10.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the Bihar State Financial Corporation. The prayer of the petitioners in this application is for quashing the First Information Report of Hajipur Town P.S.Case No. 118/1996 dated 7.4.1996 lodged for offence under sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. It may appear that on 28.6.1996 when this application was admitted for final hearing this Court had stayed further proceeding of the criminal case in hand, Hajipur Town P.S.Case No. 118/1996, and such stay order has continued till date. In such 2 a situation this Court had on 3.9.2009 directed the parties to file a supplementary affidavit as with regard to substratum of allegation in the F.I.R. relating to the financial liability of the petitioners towards the Bihar State Financial Corporation and the amount, if any, paid by the petitioners. Today a supplementary affidavit has been filed by the counsel for the petitioners wherein it has been stated that during the pendency of this application, there has been some development, inasmuch as the Corporation had floated a one time settlement scheme in which an entrepreneur could get himself absolved of his total financial liability towards the Corporation if payment of the loan amount plus 10 per cent interest thereon is paid. He would submit that the petitioners had applied for such OTS Scheme and the Corporation having accepted the offer the petitioners have also deposited the entire amount payable under the OTS Scheme i.e. 43,24,860/- and in proof thereof a receipt of the B.S.F.C. dated 5.10.2010 has also been enclosed by way of 3 Annexure S/7. Counsel for the Corporation does not dispute any of the aforementioned fact and has also submitted that the Corporation is now going to take final decision as with regard to closing the account of the petitioners upon acceptance of the amount under one time settlement scheme. In that view of the matter, when nothing has happened in the criminal case in the last 14 years, presumably under the order of the stay of this Court and the parties have now virtually settled the dispute in the manner indicated above, no useful purpose will be served by continuing the criminal prosecution and in fact the continuance of such criminal prosecution in the given circumstances will be gross abuse of the process of the Court. That being so, the criminal proceedings against the petitioners including the F.I.R. is hereby quashed. It is, however, made clear that the petitioners if required to pay any further amount in terms of one time settlement scheme must pay the same as this criminal 4 case has ended only because of their pious intention to clear the entire liability of the Corporation of the loan which was sanctioned and paid to them. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/