..(1).. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2023 OF 2008 Vikas Vinod Kumar Singh. ..Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others. ..Respondents. .... Mr.Madhukar Dalvi, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.Amol J. Phaujdar, Adv. for the respondent. Mr.V.B.Konde-Deshmukh, APP, for the State. .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J. DATED : 7th October, 2008. DATED : 7th October, 2008. DATED : 7th October, 2008. P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner-orig.accused, the learned Advocate for the respondent-orig.complainant and the learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner is praying for quashing of FIR No.57 of 2008 and the proceedings relating thereto. The case pertains to Versova police station and it is under Sections 408, 467, 477(A) of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is submitted that the matter has been ..(2).. amicably settled between the petitioner and the complainant. An affidavit has also been filed by the complainant wherein it is stated that the matter has been amicably settled and the FIR be quashed. The learned Advocate for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Anr. Investigation and Anr. Investigation and Anr. dated 20.8.2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1302 of 2008 (arising out of SLP (Cri.)No.6355 of 2005). The said case was under Section 5(1) and 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption act, 1947, 13(1) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, 120-B, 406, 463, 464, 467, 468, 471, 471A and 498A of IPC. 4. In the case of Nikhil Merchant Nikhil Merchant Nikhil Merchant (supra) the Supreme Court observed that as the disputes between the accused and the complainant have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them and the dues of the complainant have been cleared and the complainant does not have any further claim against the accused, keeping in mind that the compromise has been arrived at between the accused and the complainant the criminal proceedings against the accused came to be quashed. As the offence in the ..(3).. case relied upon and in the present case are similar, hence I am inclined to take the same view. 5. In view of the above, the FIR No.57 of 2008 of Versova police station and the proceedings relating thereto are quashed. The petitioner who is in custody be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.) (SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.)