IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No 2956 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLAKIA ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- M/S. LUCO LABORATORIES THRO ITS PORP.SHAILESHBHAI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Criminal Misc.Application No. 2956 of 1999 MR PR NANAVATI for Petitioner No. 1-2 MR KODEKAR, APP for Respondent No. 1 MR MI MERCHANT for Respondent No. 2 RULE SERVED for Respondent No. 2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLAKIA Date of decision: 17/09/2003 ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. Heard Mr.P.R.Nanavati for the petitioners, Mr.Kodekar, learned APP for the respondent State and Mr.M.I.Merchant for respondent No.2 - complainant. 2. The representative of the petitioners one Mr.Sailesh Nanjibhai Shah is present and the original complainant - Madhavlal Karsanbhai Patel is also present. According to the complainant, he is the Director of Nilam Chempack Private Limited and he has been identified as Madhubhai Karsanbhai Patel by Mr.Merchant, learned advocate for respondent No.2. They have made a statement at bar that the matter is settled between the parties. Pursuant to that, a draft is handed over to the respondent complainant and he admits that he has received the same. It is agreed between the parties that they will submit the compromise purshis before the court below. In the event of filing the compromise purshis by the parties, the court below may pass necessary orders in this behalf since the matter is compoundable. 3. In view of the above, this petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged. In case of difficulty, liberty to revive this petition is granted. (R.P.Dholakia,J) (pathan)