IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2900 OF 2008 Rajesh M. Lihala .. Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Vatsal Verma with Mr.D.S.Mishra i/by D.S.Law Bureau for the applicant. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, A.P.P for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 04th September 2008. P.C.: . Rule. The learned A.P.P waives service for the contesting respondent. Considering the controversy involved, the application is taken up for hearing. 2. The prayer in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for quashing a criminal case arising out of F.I.R lodged by one Bharat Balkrishna Parekh alleging commission of offences under section 420, 406, 408, 468, 471, 477-A, 120-B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicant has been arraigned as one of the accused. 3. The learned advocate for the applicant has invited my attention to letter dated 17th July 2002 send : 2 : by the first informant to the senior inspector of police, Economic Offences Wing, C.I.D, Mumbai recording therein that there is a complete settlement between him and accused and infact a Settlement Deed has been entered into. A statement of the first informant has been recorded by the Investigating Officer on 01st January 2004 in which the first informant accepted the settlement between him and the accused. My attention is also invited to order dated 24th November 2005 passed in Criminal Application No.3466 of 2005 as well as order dated 21st December 2006 passed in Criminal Application No.3340 of 2006 by which this Court has quashed the proceedings as against the co-accused. My attention is invited to the observations made by this Court in paragraph 4 of order passed in Criminal Application No.3340 of 2006 stating that the first informant has since expired. In the said order this Court has recorded statement made by the senior inspector of police, Economic Offences Wing, C.I.D, Mumbai that the first informant had submitted the letter dated 17th July 2002 (Exhibit C to this application). This Court after perusal of Deed of Settlement quashed proceedings against co-accused. This Court also considered the statement of the first informant recorded by the Investigating Officer on 01st January 2004. In view of : 3 : the settlement between the first informant and the accused and considering the nature of the offence alleged, this Court quashed the proceedings as against the co-accused. The learned A.P.P has submitted to the orders of the Court. 4. For the reasons which are set out in order dated 21st December 2006 in Criminal Application No.3340 of 2006, the proceedings as against the applicant will have to be also quashed in view of the settlement which is referred to in the said order. 5. Hence, I pass the following order: (i) Proceeding of Criminal Case No.54/PW/2004 arising out of C.R.No.87 of 2000 pending on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai is quashed and set aside as against the applicant. (ii) The concerned Court to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. : 4 : (A.S.Oka,J)