IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11752 of 2008 RUDRA KUMAR AGARWAL @ RUDRA KUMAR, S/O- RAJATAN PRASAD, R/O- SHYAM PLY, ASHOKA COMPLEX, MOHALLA- EXHIBITION ROAD, P.S.- GANDHI MAIDAN DISTRICT- PATNA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SACHIDANAND SAHAY, S/O- LATE DAYANAND PRASAD R/O- MOHALLA MAHBOOB KHAN TOLA, P.S.- K. HAT, DISTRICT- PURNEA. For the petitioner : Mr. Baxi S.R.P. Sinha, Sr. Advocate For the O.P. : Mr. Santosh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ----------- 4 24.11.2010 Heard. Present application has been filed seeking quashment of order dated 20.4.2006 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Purnea in Complaint Case no. 1997(C)/2005 by which cognizance under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of N.I. Act has been taken and he has been summoned. As per the prosecution case, the complainant and the petitioner were neighbours. The petitioner was in need of money. Accordingly, the complainant was approached for loan of a sum of Rs. 75,000/-. A sum of Rs. 45,000/- was paid through bank draft and Rs. 30,000/- was paid in cash with a condition that the petitioner will return the same after one month. The accused- petitioner failed to return the said amount in spite of repeated demands. It has further been alleged that the petitioner subsequently closed the shop and disappeared. A search was made whereafter the complainant was contacted at Patna and demand was made whereafter two cheques of Rs. 50,000/- and 2 25,000/- were issued which was/were deposited in the bank but was/were dishonoured due to insufficient funds. The matter was heard on several dates earlier. On 28.10.2010, the following order was passed: “Both parties present. Learned counsel representing the opposite party No. 2 submits that principal amount involved in the case is Rs. 75,000/- (Seventy Five thousand) to which learned counsel for the petitioner agrees. It has further been agreed between the parties that the petitioner shall pay to the complainant/opposite party no. 2 by way of demand draft(s) drawn on scheduled Bank for an amount of Rs. 75,000/- (Seventy five thousand) in his name which shall be payable calculated @ 6 % payable from April, 2005. Learned counsel for the complainant/opposite party no. 2 submits that if the said amount is paid to him then he would not be prosecuting present criminal proceeding against the petitioner. Mr. Bakshi S.R.P. Sinha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, in pursuance of the aforesaid stand, handed in two drafts bearing No. 777875 dated 21.10.2010 for a sum of Rs. 60,000/-(Sixty thousand) and D.D. No. 777876 dated 21.10.2010 for a sum of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen thousand). Both the drafts have been drawn on Union Bank of India, Purnea Branch and is/are payable to Sri S.N. Sahay. Learned counsel for the complainant/opposite party no. 2 accepts the aforesaid two drafts. As jointly prayed, list this matter within top 15 cases after 02 weeks.” Counsel for the complainant-O.P. No. 2 states before this Court that he has received all the amount together with interest in terms of order dated 28.10.2010. It is stated that in view of receipt of his amount together with interest @ 6 % per annum, he would not be pursuing the present application against the petitioner. A receipt duly signed by Sri Santosh Kumar Sinha No. 3 2, learned Advocate representing the Opposite party, has been filed today which is kept on record marked “Y”. Considering the nature of allegation and the out of Court settlement arrived at between the parties and the stand taken before this Court by the learned counsel for the complainant, this Court is satisfied that allowing the prosecution to continue in the backdrop of the aforesaid settlement between the parties would be nothing but the abuse of the process of the Court. Consequently, the application is allowed. The entire criminal proceeding including the impugned order dated 20.4.2006 passed in Complaint Case no. 1997(C)/2005 is quashed and set aside. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )