IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1042 OF 2008. V.S.Sundararaman. .. Petitioner. versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. .... Mr. S.K.Chaturvedi, i/b. M/s. Chaturvedi and Associates, for the Petitioner. Mr. Santosh Deshpande, for the Respondent Nos.2 to 3. Mrs.P.P.Shinde, APP, for the Respondent-State. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 17th September 2008. : 17th September 2008. : 17th September 2008. ORAL ORAL ORAL JUDGMENT : JUDGMENT : JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. The leaned APP waives service for the first Respondent. The learned Counsel for the second and the third Respondents waives service. The prayer in this application invoking power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is for quashing criminal proceedings based on F.I.R lodged by the second Respondent. The quashing is sought on the basis of the consent terms filed in a suit filed by the second and the third Respondent to which the present petitioner is a party defendant. The second Respondent is the husband of the third respondent. The F.I.R was lodged by the second Respondent. 2. Reliance has been placed on paragraph 13 of the : 2 : consent terms filed in the suit no.2831/1997. The said paragraph 13 reads thus :- "13. The Plaintiff for himself and for his family members and the Companies where they are directors or partners or Proprietors, hereby confirm, declares and agrees that they have no claims of any nature whatsoever against Mrs. Jayanthi Sundararaman and Mr.V.S. Sundararaman and hereby agree not to make any claims or demands of any Nature viz. Civil and/or Criminal including Criminal Case No.2 of 1997 pending in Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Esplanade Mumbai The Plaintiff further agrees that she along with Shri Natrajan shall also take steps to withdraw and/or get dismissed all such proceedings initiated by the Plaintiffs and/or the said Shri S. Natrajan or at their instance against Mrs.Jayanthi Sundararaman and Mr.V.S. Sundararaman which may be pending. True copies of all Documents relating to the said matters in the Possession of the Plaintiff have been handed over by the Plaintiffs to the Defendants." : 3 : 3. Reliance has also been placed on letter dated 3rd March 2008 singed by the second respondent and his advocate addressed to the petitioner in which the second respondent has recorded his no objection for allowing petition for quashing of the F.I.R. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the second and the third respondents states that the second and the third respondents have no objection for quashing the criminal proceeding by allowing this application. However, he pointed out that certain compliances have not been made by the petitioner. There is a rejoinder filed by the petitioner contraverting what is stated in the affidavit-in-reply by the second and the third respondents. The learned counsel for the second and the third respondents has not disputed what is stated in the consent terms and aforesaid letter dated 3rd March 2008. The consent terms disclose that there is a complete settlement between the parties as regards the dispute in respect of which the F.I.R was lodged by the second respondent. Considering the allegations in the F.I.R, now no purpose will be served by continuing prosecution in view of the settlement between the parties. After : 4 : having agreed to settle the dispute, now continuation of the criminal proceeding is nothing but the abuse of process of law. If at all there is any grievance as regards non-compliance with the terms of the settlement on the part of the petitioner, the second and the third respondents are free to take appropriate steps in that behalf. 5. Hence, the Petition is disposed of by passing following order :- (1) Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads thus :- "(a) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash the Criminal Proceedings in Criminal Complaint No.23/PW/2005 pending before the Learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 19th Court at Esplanade, Mumbai." (2) The concerned Court to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. : 5 : (A.S.Oka, J)