1 wp1429-11.doc ttm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1429 OF 2011 Tytan Organics P.Ltd. .. Petitioner Vs. Jayesh S/O Champshi Ruparel and Anr. .. Respondents Mr.P.M.Rustom Khan for the petitioner Smt.Barsha Parulekar for respondent no.1 CORAM: K.K.TATED, J VACATION JUDGE DATE: 20th MAY, 2011 PC: 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present Criminal Writ Petition is filed for quashing the proceedings of case no.65/SW of 2009 pending in the Metropolitan Magistrate s 34 ’ th Court at Vikhroli, Mumbai as well as F.I.R. registered by the Tilak Nagar Police Station bearing MECR NO.6 of 2009 under sections 406, 420 r/w 34 and 114 of the I.P.C. against the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter is settled out of court. They have already signed 2 wp1429-11.doc consent terms in Summary Suit No.855 of 2010 which is at page 78 being Exhibit G . In Consent Terms para 6 sub ‘ ’ clauses i to iv read as under: (i) The plaintiff shall immediately and unconditionally take steps to withdraw and shall withdraw all complaints and appeals arising therefrom and all other ancilliary proceedings filed by the plaintiff against the defendant and its directors under the provisions of section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1888. (ii) The plaintiff represents and warrants that the exhaustive list of the said proceedings referred to in (i) above filed by the plaintiff against the defendant and/or its Directors are enlisted in Annexure A to these consent ‘ ’ terms. The plaintiff expressly declares and confirm that there are no other proceedings whatsoever filed by it under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1888 against the defendant and/or its directors. (iii) Pending such withdrawal the plaintiff expressly undertakes not to procecute the said proceedings enlisted in Annexure A against ‘ ’ the defendant and/or its directors under any circumstances whatsoever. (iv) The plaintiff had filed complaint no. 65/SW/09 in the Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Vikhroli, Mumbai against the defendant and its directors and others, which complaint was subsequently registered as MECR No.6 of 2009 by the Tilak Nagar Police Station. The defendant shall institute the requisite criminal application in this Hon ble Court, for ’ 3 wp1429-11.doc quashing case no.65/SW/09 and MECR No.6 of 2009. The plaintiff shall immediately and unconditionally withdraw and/or cooperate with the defendant and its directors towards the unconditional quashing of Case No. 65/SW/09 and MECR No.6 of 2009 registered against the defendant and its directors. 4. In support of the contention of the petitioner, respondent no.1 original complainant Jayesh s/o Champshi Ruparel filed his affidavit dt. 19.5.11 admitting these facts. As the matter is settled out of court and respondent no.1 original complainant having no objection prayer clause (a) is granted. 5. Writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) which reads as under: (a) that the proceedings of Case No. “ 65/SW/2009 pending in the Metropolitan Magistrate s 34 ’ th Court, at Vikhroli, Mumbai, as well as the FIR registered by the Tilaknagar Police Station being MECR No.6 of 2009 u/s/ 406, 420 r/w 34 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners abovenamed be quashed.” 6. Petition is disposed of accordingly (K.K.TATED,J.)