https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339833 Where parties voluntarily settled the underlying dispute and the complainant had already received the compromise benefit, the HC held that continuation of criminal proceedings arising from the same transaction would be contrary to the binding settlement and an abuse of process of court. As the compromise was not shown to be involuntary and the complainant did not offer to restore the benefit received, the FIR and connected proceedings were quashed to give effect to the settlement. en-us Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Mar 2017 07:12:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339833 Where parties voluntarily settled the underlying dispute and the complainant had already received the compromise benefit, the HC held that continuation of criminal proceedings arising from the same transaction would be contrary to the binding settlement and an abuse of process of court. As the compromise was not shown to be involuntary and the complainant did not offer to restore the benefit received, the FIR and connected proceedings were quashed to give effect to the settlement. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339833