1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1923 OF 2009 Narayan Vishvanath Anavakar ...Applicant vs. 1 State of Maharashtra 2 Amish Jayant Dharod ...Respondents Mr.C.K.Pendse for the applicant Ms Bocarro for respondent no.2 Ms A.T.Javeri A.P.P for State CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : JULY 14, 2009 P.C. 1 Rule. Learned A.P.P waives service for State. The counsel for the second respondent waives service. The prayer in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 is for quashing the proceedings of the criminal case filed at the instance of the second respondent. The second respondent lodged F.I.R alleging commission of various offences under sections 406, 408, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Charge sheet has been filed after completing investigation. It must be stated here that the prayer in this application is for quashing the prosecution on the basis of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties on 20th April 2009 in the form of consent terms which are annexed as annexure `B . It must be noted that the applicant had filed earlier application no.433 of 2009 for quashing of the proceedings on the same ground. 2 However, the said petition was not entertained. However, the applicant was permitted to file a fresh application. Perusal of the F.I.R shows that the first informant is a Director of a limited company which is manufacturing the chemical powder. The applicant was appointed by the said company as an Export Officer. The allegation made in the complaint is as regards the certain acts or omissions of the applicant in his capacity as an Export Officer of the said company. The allegation is that certain licences were sold by the applicant in the market thereby causing financial loss to the second respondent. In the consent terms which are annexed to the application it is stated that there was misunderstanding between the applicant and the second respondent. Now, the entire matter has been amicably settled. 2 The learned A.P.P submitted that on the basis of the F.I.R lodged by the second respondent, the police machinery has spent substantial time. A Charge sheet has been filed. The learned counsel for the second respondent states that the second respondent has paid a donation of Rs.50,000/- to the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority. 3 Looking to the nature of the allegations made in the F.I.R, in view of the settlement between the applicant and the second respondent, now no purpose will be served 3 by prosecuting the criminal proceedings. Chances of conviction are very bleak as there is a commercial settlement between the parties. Hence, a case is made out for exercising the power under section 482 of the said Code. Hence, I pass the following order : 4 Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). JUDGE