LALIT TAPADIYA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that the complainant purchased jewellery articles on 22.12.2008 and on 27.12.2008 she raised the dispute about the transactions. On 01.01.2009, the petitioner written a letter to the bank to reverse the amount if the amount is credited. On 02.01.2009, FIR No. 2/2009 came to be lodged at Police Station Sindhi Camp, Jaipur (South) for the offence under Sections 420, 384 IPC by the complainant.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties, which has not been opposed by the learned counsel appearing for the complainant/respondent No.2, who has submitted that the complainant does not want to pursue the complaint filed by her.

(3.) Learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation And Another, reported in (2008)9 SCC 677 , wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that on overall view of facts on compromise between the parties, by which parties withdrew all claims and allegations against each other, technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way of quashing of the criminal proceedings, since continuance of the same would be a futile exercise.