- 1 - IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2252 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.2252 OF 2008 APPLICATION NO.2252 OF 2008 Rajesh Nagji Nisar ...Applicant vs. Sanjay Khiyasi Nagda & Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Meghashyam Kocharekar for the applicant Mr.J.P.Yagnik A.P.P. for State Mr.Rahul Hule for the Respondent No.1. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. A.S.OKA,J. DATE DATE DATE : AUGUST 6,2008 : AUGUST 6,2008 : AUGUST 6,2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: 1. Heard Advocate for the Applicant. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned A.P.P waives service for the State of Maharashtra. The learned Advocate for the first Respondent waives service. It is stated that the first Respondent is personally present in the court and the concerned Investigating Officer is also present in the court. 2. The petitioner has been arraigned as an accused by the second respondent by lodging the F.I.R. alleging commission of offence under section 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegation in the F.I.R is that the Applicant purchased from time to time the articles such as monitors of the computers, Laptaps, Printers etc. The allegation is that the Applicant induced second Respondent to sell the said articles and without paying the price thereof, the applicant disposed of the said articles and caused loss to the second Respondent. - 2 - When the application for anticipatory bail came up before this court on 24th April 2008, there was a settlement between the Applicant and the second Respondent which was reduced into writing in the form of consent terms signed by the Applicant and the second respondent and their respective Advocates. Accepting the said settlement,this court granted anticipatory bail in favour of the Applicant. In the said consent terms, clause (g) provides that separate petition will be filed by the Applicant for quashing the proceeding and the second Respondent will give a consent for quashing the said proceeding. The learned counsel for the applicant and the second Respondent have confirmed the correctness of the statements recorded in the consent terms. 3. Perusal of the F.I.R shows that the offence related to commercial transaction between the Applicant and the second respondent. Now, there is a complete settlement between the applicant and the second Respondent. 4. In the circumstances, considering the nature of the offence alleged, no purpose will be served by continuing the further proceedings. This is a fit case for exercising power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Accordingly, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). - 3 - JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE