1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 43 OF 1999 Mrs. Manjula Chainroop & anr. ...Applicant VERSUS Maharshi Vedvyas and anr. ...Respondents ..... Shri L.V.Sangeet, advocate for the petitioners Shri A.S.Bajaj, advocate for respondent no.1 Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for respondent no.2 ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 3rd May, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Heard Shri L.V.Sangeet, advocate for the petitioners, Shri A.S.Bajaj, advocate for respondent no.1 and Shri D.V.Tele, A.P.P. for respondent no.2. 2 Learned counsel for the respective parties submitted that the parties have arrived at compromise and decided to settle the 2 matter at Rs. 7,14,000/-, to be paid by the petitioners (original accused) to respondent no.1 (original complainant). Accordingly, learned counsel Shri Sangeet appearing on behalf of the petitioners tendered the Demand Draft No. 611355, dated 27.4.2010, for Rs.7,14,000/-, drawn on Central Bank of India, payable at Sangamner (Maharashtra State) to the learned counsel for respondent no.1 (original complainant) Shri Bajaj, copy thereof is tendered on record and same is marked 'X'. 3 Shri Bajaj, learned counsel for respondent no1. (original complainant) accepted the above referred Demand Draft towards the full and final settlement of the dispute between the parties and made a statement on instructions of Shri Satish Eknath Khoje, constituted power of attorney holder of respondent no.1, who is present today in the court, and tendered the copy of power of attorney dated 25.5.1998 and same is taken on record and marked as document ‘Y’, that upon realization of the amount of the demand draft, respondent no. 1 (original complainant) shall withdraw Criminal Case No. 410 of 1998, pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sangamner and the said statement is accepted and taken on record. 4 Accordingly, in view of the said statement and its acceptance, Shri Sangeet, learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions of Shri Mangilal Jain, who is authorized person on behalf of the petitioners, who is present today in the court, requested to 3 withdraw the present petition. 5 In view of the said submission, present Criminal Writ Petition No. 43 of 1999 stands dismissed as withdrawn. interim relief, if any, stands vacated. Rule stands discharged. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE), JUDGE. dbm/crwp43.99