THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.1647 of 2008 Date of Order: 11-11-2010 Between: MGM Maran ..Petitioner and State ofA.P. rep. By PP, HighCourt of A.P., Hyderabad and another ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY Crl.P.No.1647 of 2008 Oral order: This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.485 of 2007 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Shadnagar registered against the petitioner for the offences under Section 406, 409, 417, 418, 419, 420, 423, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code. The 2nd respondent—de-facto complainant made a private compliant to the Magistrate, which was forwarded to the police who registered the same as Cr.No.220 of 2006. The police after investigation filed final report treating the same as civil nature. Questioning the final report the defacto complainant filed a protest petition in Crl.M.P.No.890 of 2007. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties took the case on file as C.C.No.485 of 2007 against A1 to A4 for the offences aforementioned. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced an agreement dated 26-08-2009 entered in pursuance of the Memorandum of Understanding executed on 09-07-2009 between the de-facto complainant and the petitioner/accused No.1 wherein the de-facto complainant agreed to withdraw: C.C.No.485 of 2007 pending on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Shadnagar; apart from W.P.Nos.3855 of 2008 and 664 of 2007 filed by the de-facto complainant against the petitioner/accused No.1; W.P.Nos.5194 to 5197 of 2007 and W.P.No.871 filed by the wife of the de-facto complainant against accused No.1 & complainant and W.P.Nos.9172 of 2007 & 4798 of 2008 filed by the de-facto complainant and his wife; and the accused also agreed to withdraw all the cases pending before various courts in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh and also before the Arbitration Tribunal headed by Justice R.Jayasimha Babu as per the settlement arrived. In view of the same, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of the court to withdraw the criminal petition. Permission is accorded. The criminal Petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J. 11-11-2010 Murthy