IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.27511 of 2002 Vijay Kumar Singh , Son of Late Damodar Singh, Branch Manager, Lloyds Finance Limited, 1st Floor, room No. III, Jagat Trade Centre, Frazer Road, Patna – 1 …. Petitioner Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. Shri Satendra Kumar Sinha, S/o Late Jay Narayan, R/o Shanti Sadan, East Budha Colony, Patna Complainant – Opposite Party 2nd Set 3. Shri Raj Narayan Gupta, Chairman 4. Shri Mukesh R. Gupta, Vice Chairman 5. Shri G.C. Garg, Managing Director, All official resident of Lloyds Finance Limited 601, Raheja Center, Nariman Point, Bombay. Opposite Party 3rd Set. ----------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. J. U padhayay, A.P.P. For O.P. No. 2 : None. ------- 7 24.2.2009 This application by the petitioner who happens to be the Branch Manager of Lloyds Finance Ltd., Patna Branch, who is one of the accused of Complaint Case No. 1426(C) of 2001 has prayed for the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding emanating therefrom including the order dated 31.8.2001 passed by Sri P.N.Sharma, Judicial Magistrate, Patna whereby he has taken cognizance against the accused persons under sections 406 and 120 IPC . Although notice was duly served on the complainant – O.P. No. 2 he has chosen not to appear and contest this application. A supplementary affidavit has been filed in the Court by the petitioner to show that all amounts due to the complainant, Satendra Kumar Sinha, had been paid to him in full and final settlement of his dues in pursuance of the memorandum of understanding dated - 2 - 16.3.2004 and in token of such receipt of the outstanding amount the complainant, Satendra Kumar Sinha, has granted a receipt. The memorandum of understanding along with the receipt granted has been appended with the supplementary affidavit as Annexure 5. Since all the outstanding dues of the complainant has been cleared and the fact is accepted by the complainant through the grant of receipt no grievance now remains and continuance of the proceeding would amount to be an abuse of the process of the Court. In the aforesaid circumstances the impugned order so far as the petitioner is concerned is hereby quashed and the application is allowed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)