ADITYA GEONKA Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K Paul, the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner who represents both Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 19 of 2013 and Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 20 of 2013. Since both the cases are similar in nature, they have been taken up for disposal by this common judgment.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially there were a dispute between the petitioner namely Shri. Aditya Goenka and the complainant Shri. Tashi Dolma in Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 19 of 2013 and Shri. Rajen Chetri in Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 20 of 2013 who filed FIRs with the police which were registered as Shillong Sadar PS Case No. 34(3) 2010 in Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 19 of 2013 and Shillong Sadar PS Case No. 35(3) of 2010 in Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 20 of 2013 respectively. There was also a Civil Suit filed before the Asst. District Judge, Shillong. In the meantime, the petitioner and the complainants came to a settlement outside the Court and settled the matter amicably and also pointed out the Settlement Deeds which are at Annexure-2 (Page-16) in Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 19 of 2013 and Annexure-2 (Page-12) in Crl. Petn.(SH) No. 20 of 2013. The learned counsel further argues that since the matter has already been settled between the parties and the offences are not serious in nature, the matter may be quashed.

(3.) Mr. N Khan the learned counsel for respondent No. 2 in support of the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner Mr K Paul and prays that the proceeding may be quashed for the interest of justice.