IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION jmi CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2259 OF 2010 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1837 OF 2010 Shri Vivek B. Bharatiya -- APPLICANT V/s. 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. Shri Dilip V. Pacheriwal -- RESPONDENTS Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Sr. Advocate i/b. Mr. J.M. Puranik Advocate for Applicant Mr. Rajesh More, APP for State CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 11th OCTOBER 2011 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for applicant accused. Respondent (original complainant) though admitted to be served, however, did not respond. A letter dated 28th March, 2008 of the original complainant M/s. Benktesh Synth Processors Pvt. Ltd., along with Board Resolution is perused. The letter indicates acknowledgment of receipt of payment from the accused applicant Manoj Agrawal (Petition bearing No.1837 of 2010) while in Petition No.2259 of 2010, reference there is of Vivek Bharatiya. His name appears at Page 34 at Sr.No.4, Page 33 at Sr.No.4 (Shubhchintak Steel). Incidentally apprehending arrest in the said C.R. No.I/140 of 2007 registered with L.T. Marg Police Station, an application in terms of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. was moved by Manoj Agarwal, in which the original complainant appeared before this Court and made a statement, that he does not want to proceed with the complaint, since he has already received his outstanding dues from the said applicant (Manoj Agarwal). My attention is also invited to earlier orders dated 22nd March, 2010 in Criminal Writ Petition No.405 of 2010 moved by Anand M. Gupta, in the said proceedings in which also rule is granted, however, the proceedings are not quashed. 2. In the light of these developments, the proceedings are quashed to the extent of applicants herein. Both the Petitions allowed as above. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL,J. )