1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1185 OF 2009 Harshad S. Mehta ...Petitioner. v/s. The State and Anr. ...Respondents. Dr. Saikumar Pathrud M. ,adv. For the Petitioner. Mr. Shankar V. Mhatre, adv. For the Respondent No.2. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : APRIL 13, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent no.2, who is the original complainant. None appears for the State. 2 To state in brief, the petitioner was an employee working with the respondent no.2 alongwith several other employees. Respondent no.2 was dealing with shares and securities in Bombay Stock Exchange. It was revealed that the petitioner had misused and forged certain cheques of the firm of the respondent no.2 and had misappropriated an amount of Rs.6,60,000/-. Out of that, an amount of Rs.2,95,000/- was recovered by the respondent no.2. As the balance could not be recovered , he filed report before the Additional Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch. On the basis of that investigation was made and case was 2 filed by the police before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, under Sections 408, 467 and 471 of the I.P.C. Petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. Respondent no.2 has also filed his affidavit-in-reply and according to him, his wife, who was main witness has expired and it was last wish of his wife, whose signature was forged to forgive and not to proceed with the complaint and, therefore, he does not want to prosecute the petition. The learned counsel for the respondent no.2 also gives consent to quash the said proceedings. 3 In view of the facts and circumstances, in the interest of justice, petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). (J.H. BHATIA,J.)