1 wp2601.09.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2601 OF 2009 Shri Rajesh Rameshbhai Patel ....Petitioner. Vs. The Senior Inspector of Police, Daman Police Station, Daman & Ors. ....Respondents. Mr. Subhodh Desai, for the Petitioner. Mr. D.A. Nalawade, Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 3. Mr. A.S. Gadkari, APP for the State. CORAM : B.H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE : 19th July, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard. Rule. 2 Respondents waive service. The Petition is heard finally. 3 In the earlier order dated 07/05/2010, this Court had noted down the statement made by Mr. Subhodh Desai, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, that during the pendency of this petition, the petitioner and the complainant had settled their all disputes and the complainant did 2 wp2601.09.sxw not desire to prosecute his complaint further. The complainant i.e. present Respondent No.1 was not present before the Court and therefore, time was granted. 4 Mr. Narendra D. Thakkar, Unit Head of Respondent No.2, (Aims Industries Ltd.) is present before us, on the basis of the letter of authorization issued in his favour by the said company. He states that the compromise has been arrived at, between the parties and the terms of compromise signed on 26/02/2010 were placed before the Civil Judge, Senior Division of Daman. The learned Judge has passed an order accepting the compromise. 5 Mr. Narendra Thakkar has filed an affidavit on behalf of Respondent No.2 and supported the prayers for quashing of R.C.C. No. 89 of 2008. Mr. Nalawade, standing counsel for Respondent No. 3, has no objection. 6 Hence, the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)