ABU ASIM AZMI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable with the consent of parties.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 has tendered across bar affidavit. It is stated in the said affidavit that the compliant filed before the Sessions Court, Palghar was out of misunderstanding. Respondent no. 2 has filed withdrawal purshis before Sessions Court, Palghar stating that petitioners are not having any concern with Respondent no. 2. He is working under contract and there were payment dispute between Respondent no. 2 and contractor and the said contractor has already paid entire amount of the work done by him.

(3.) In the averments in the affidavit are read in its entirety, it appears that the said complaint was filed by Respondent no. 2 out of misunderstanding and the offences alleged in the complaint have not taken place.