MANJUNATH PUJARI Vs. STATE OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Dharmanand Vernekar for the Petitioners, Mr. Pravin Faldessai, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-Respondents No.1 and 2 and Mr. Parag Rao for the Respondents No.3 and 4.

(2.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith at the request of and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners seek the quashing of FIR No.141/2018 dated 28.06.2018 and the consequent charge-sheet No.141/2018 dated 31.08.2018 filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Panaji.

(3.) Mr. Vernekar, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the petitioners and the respondents no.3 and 4, the original complainants based on whose complaint the FIR came to be lodged have settled the differences amongst themselves in an amicable manner. He points out that the terms of such settlement have also been set out in the consent terms filed by the parties in Regular Civil Suit No.68/2018/B in the Court of the Ad-hoc Senior Civil Judge at Panaji. He points out that in such consent terms, the parties have agreed to withdraw several complaints and cases filed by them against each other. He points out that the complaint on basis of which the impugned FIR came to be registered, is also one of the complaints which the respondents no.3 and 4 have agreed to withdraw. Mr. Vernekar submits that the complaints have a civil profile and now that the disputes are already settled, the impugned FIR and the consequent impugned charge-sheet be quashed in the exercise of this Court "?s extraordinary jurisdiction as well as inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.