1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.986 OF 2009 Kamlesh Bhatt Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and another Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.987 OF 2009 Sumit Nevtia Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and another Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.988 OF 2009 Rajesh Khanna Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and another Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.989 OF 2009 Parag R. Bhatia Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Ms.Tripti R. Shetty for petitioners. P.D.Prasad Rao for respondent no.2. Y.S.Shinde, APP for State. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 17th July 2009 PC :- 2 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the second respondent. The prayer made in these petitions invoking section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for quashing the criminal proceedings initiated on the basis of FIR lodged by the second respondent. The prayer for quashing has been made on the basis of the settlement between the parties. The second respondent has tendered affidavits recording that the parties have entered into an agreement. The second respondent stated that in view of the agreement which is annexed to the petitions, the second respondent has no objection for quashing the proceedings. The learned APP opposed the petition by pointing out that on the basis of the complaint lodged by the second respondent the police machinery has carried out investigation and by spending substantial time and money, charge sheets have been kept ready but the same are not filed. Learned counsel for the second respondent states that for compensating the State, the second respondent has paid a donation of Rs.1.00 lakh to Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority and a receipt is produced before the Court for perusal of the Court. 2. I have perused the allegations made in the FIR.. I have also perused the agreement between the parties on which reliance has been placed in support of this petition. The dispute appears to be a commercial dispute between the parties and the agreement records complete settlement of disputes between the parties on the basis of the terms and conditions incorporated therein. Certain amount has been exchanged 3 between the parties. In view of the settlement of all the disputes between the petitioner and the second respondent, now no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution. The chances of conviction are very weak. 3. Considering the peculiar facts, this is a case where power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will have to be exercised. 4. Hence, I pass following order :- (a) Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a); (b) All concerned to act on an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by registry of this Court. (A.S.OKA, J.)