PRADIP RAGHUNATH DAUD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Criminal Application, the applicant has put forth prayer clause B as under :-

(2.) We are not mentioning the name of the informant and the name of the educational institution in this order, for obvious reasons.

(3.) The learned advocate for the applicant submits, on instructions, that respondent No.2/ original informant is agreeable to settle the dispute with him and she has entered her compromise undertaking dated 27.01.2021 at page 60 in the paper book. He submits that the informant has realized that she had filed the complaint against the applicant under a misunderstanding. Her misunderstanding has been cleared and she does not desire to prosecute her complaint. Reliance is placed on the judgment delivered by the learned Full Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the matter of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another , 2017 CrLJ 2161.