(1.) These petitions coming on for admission are considered for final disposal having regard to the circumstances of the case.
(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
(3.) Some of the petitioners though not public servants, have been accused along with petitioners who are public servants, for offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Questioning the same, relying on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh, where after discussing the entire case law, the Apex Court has laid down the guidelines under which this Court can quash proceedings under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, if matters are settled between the parties, notwithstanding the allegations involving non-compoundable offences. Placing reliance on the same, these petitioners claim that since there has been settlement of amounts that were involved, in that, there were losses incurred by a Public Sector Bank which has been made good and the Bank has issued a nodue Certificate and therefore, the losses claimed having been made good and there is settlement of the claim by the Bank which was the source of the complaint and therefore, seek that the proceedings be quashed. The petitioners having approached the trial Court seeking discharge on that very ground, the trial Court has formed an opinion that it has no such power to discharge the accused on the ground that there has been a settlement when there is no longer a cause of action insofar as losses are concerned and it is more appropriate to approach this Court seeking to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Hence, this fervent prayer to quash the proceedings.