TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 617
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2017 along with Annexure R-1 (colly) are taken on record subject to all just exceptions. CRM stands allowed. CRM-M No.2832 of 2017 Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of complaint No.271 dated 09.07.2014 (Annexure P-1) filed by respondent No.2 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short, the Act). Challenge has also been laid to the summoning order dated 10.07.2014 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, whereby the petitioner has been summoned to face trial under Section 138 of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent No.2 has filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Act and in the said complaint, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... patched up amicably between the parties on the following terms and conditions: 1. That the party of the second part received the cheque amount to his entire satisfaction from the party of the first part and now nothing remains due in between them. The party of the second part undertakes not to claim any money whatsoever in any manner whatsoever from the party of the first part in future qua the cheques mentioned above. 2. That the party of the second part also undertake to withdraw his respective criminal complaints u/s 138 of N.I. Act filed by them against the party of the first part and also undertakes to withdraw the civil suit, if any, filed by him against the party of first part." Learned counsel for the petitione....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e respondent No.2 as well, but no such material has been brought on record to establish the fact that the amount was ever paid to the respondent. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. There is no dispute that the compromise deed dated 21.08.2015 was reduced into writing and was signed by both the parties as well as witnesses mentioned therein. Acting on the said compromise deed, the petitioner and his brother did not pursue the FIR No.71 dated 02.07.2015 under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC registered against respondent No.2 and one Naresh Jain at Police Station Daresi, District Ludhiana, as it was settled in unequivocal terms that respondent No.2 Satish Garg has received the cheque amount to his entire satisfaction from the petit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he parties and amount having been received by the complainant, the continuation of proceedings is nothing but misuse of the process of the Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has been pleased to observe as under:- 14. This Court in Ruchi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Agrawal & Ors. [2004 (8) Supreme 525], in almost a similar situation has quashed a criminal proceeding against the husband, stating : "....Therefore, we are of the opinion that the appellant having received the relief she wanted without contest on the basis of the terms of the compromise, we cannot now accept the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant. In our opinion, the conduct of the appellant indicates that the criminal complaint from which this appeal arises ....