REDDYS LABORATORIES LTD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Misc. Application No. 6717 of 2000 is filed by the applicant original accused for an appropriate order to quash and set aside the complaint being criminal case No. 634 of 2000 and the summons / warrants issued thereunder pending in the file of ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.20, Ahmedabad.

(2.) A criminal complaint has been filed by the respondent No.2 herein original complainant in the Court of ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.20, Ahmedabad being criminal case No. 23 of 2000 against the applicant - original accused for the offence under sections 406 r.w. 409 of the I.P.C. alleging inter alia that some shares of the applicant No.1 company were purchased by the complainant, however, the same were not transferred in their name and consequently, whenever the bonus shares were declared and issued, the same were not issued in favour of the original complainant and therefore, it is alleged that the applicant has committed offence under sections 406 r.w. 409 of the I.P.C. It appears that in the said complaint, the ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.20, Ahmedabad has issued summons upon the applicant for the offence punishable under sections 403, 406 r.w. 114 of the I.P.C. and therefore, the applicant has preferred present application under section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash and set aside the said complaint.

(3.) Today, when the matter is called out, respondent No.2 original complainant is personally present in the Court. Shri Mihir Thakore, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the applicant as well as the respondent No.2 party-in-person original complainant have jointly submitted that the parties have settled the disputes and the applicant with a view to put an end to this litigation as well as other litigations, agreed to pay an amount of Rs.11,34,981/- by demand draft in favour of Nila Bipinchandra Shah. It is also reported that the said demand draft has been handed over to the respondent No.2 party-in-person and the respondent No.2 party-in-person has also admitted having accepted the said demand draft. It is submitted that on payment of the aforesaid amount towards the shares/bonus shares, etc., nothing is remained to be paid to the respondent No.2 and/or his wife. The respondent No.2 original complainant has also submitted that in view of the settlement entered into between the parties, he has no objection, if the complaint is quashed and set aside.