IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.22829 of 2005 1. LIOYDS FINANCE LTD. THROUGH, ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, NAMELY, PANKAJ DESAI, SON OF SHRTI RATILAL DESAI, II FLOOR, VIRAJ IMPLEX, HOUSE 47, P.D.MELLOW ROAD, P.S. MASJID BANDER, MUMBAI-400009. 2. PANKAJ DESAI @ PANKAJ R.DESAI, SON OF SHRI RATILAL DESAI, MANAGING DIRECTOR, LlOYDS FINANCE LIMITED, II FLOOR, VIRAJ IMPLEX, HOUSE 47, P.D.MELLOW ROAD, P.S. MASJID BANDER, MUMBAI-400009. 3. VIJAY KUMAR SINGH @ BIJAY SINGH, SON OF LATE DAMODAR SINGH, BRANCH MANAGER, LlOYDS FINANCE LIMITED, IST FLOOR, III JAGAT TRADE CENTRE, FRAZER ROAD, PATNA. …………..PETITIONERS Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. MR. TARA SHARAN SINHA, SON OF LATE SITA SHARAN SINHA, RESIDENT OF BAHADURPUR HOUSING SOCIETY, TOWN AND DISTRICT PATNA-800020. …………OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 8 9.4.2010 The petitioners seek quashing of the order dated 5.5.2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patna in Complaint Case No.2400©/2004 whereby cognizance has been taken against the petitioners under sections 406, 420 and 120-B of the Penal Code. The petitioner no.1 is a Non-Banking Finance Company. The Opposite party no.2 filed a complaint case alleging therein that he has not been paid the matured value of the amount by the petitioner company. Learned counsel for the petitioners filed a supplementary affidavit annexing a receipt granted by the Opposite party no.2 towards full and final settlement of his dues. He further submits that in similar cases this court has quashed the criminal prosecution as the compromise in between the parties has arrived at. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, no useful purpose would be served in continuance of the criminal 2 KHAN prosecution against the petitioners and as such the impugned order dated 5.5.2005 passed in Complaint Case No.2400©/2004 as well as criminal prosecution against the petitioners are quashed. In the result, this application is allowed. (S.P.Singh,J)