IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20225 of 1999 M/S SUGAM PARIVAHAN (P) LTD. Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 6 30-4-2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Although the names of counsel for the opposite party on.2, the complainant appear in the daily cause list but no one has appeared to contest this quashing application. 2. Petitioner is a company which has filed this application through its Manager for quashing of order of cognizance dated 19-12-1998 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ist. Class, Patna in complaint case no. 414 ( C )/98 for the offences under sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It has been claimed in the quashing application on the basis of annexure-6 an agreement dated 14-7-99 that the complainant and the petitioner have settled their differences and some amount has already been received by the complainant.and as would appear from the agreement,( annexure-6) that the complainant has also agreed to withdraw the complaint case in question after filing of compromise petition. 4. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of complainant, opposite party no.2 to contest the aforesaid claim and nobody has appeared to submit otherwise. In the facts of the case, in the interest of justice and the compromise between the parties as is evident from annexure-6 the impugned order of 2 cognizance as well as the entire criminal proceeding against the petitioner are hereby quashed. This application stands allowed. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.)