1. Criminal Application Nos. 5882/2017 and 6378/2017 are filed under sections 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.' for short) for relief of quashing of F.I.R. No. 212/2017 registered with Kranti Chowk Police Station, Aurangabad for offences punishable under sections 420, 406, 120-B of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC' for short) and sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishment) Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). Another relief for giving stay to the proceeding bearing Special Case (MPID) No. 2/2017, which is pending before Special Judge, Aurangabad is also claimed. Both the sides are heard. Papers of investigation were made available to this Court.

2. The crime is registered on the basis of report given by respondent No. 2 Rushikumar, who is resident of Aurangabad and who is trading in foodgrains. He has contended that he purchases foodgrain like Jawar, Bazara, maize, wheat etc. from farmers and he sells the foodgrains through broker Swastik Corporation of Aurangabad to various companies from other State. He had agreement with Swastik Corporation. It is his contention that on credit, he had sold 1007 quintile of maize to Anil Limited, Ahamadabad, Gujrat through Swastik Corporation and the value of the goods sold was around Rs. 14,48,754/-.

3. It is the case of the first informant that when the goods were sold to Anil Limited, the cheque issued on the account of Anil Mines and Mineral dated 31.5.2016 was given to him. It is contended that on inquiry, it was represented to him by the applicants that there was no money in the account of Anil Limited Company and so, the cheque, was given on the account of other company. It is contended that representation was then made that the amount of the first informant will be treated as deposit and the interest at the rate of 18% on it will be given to the first informant. Request was made not to present the cheque for encashment.

4. It is the case of first informant that due to aforesaid representation, he agreed to keep the amount of Rs. 14,48,754/- as deposit in the company of the applicants as he was to get interest at the rate of 18% p.a. It is contended that till March 2017, the date of the report given to police, he was entitled to get total interest of Rs. 1,95,580/- on aforesaid deposited amount. It is contended that till the date of F.I.R. the amount was not given to him and the cheque was presented by him for encashment on 1.3.2017, but the check bounced as account was blocked. He mentioned the names of all the Directors of the company, who have filed the two proceedings as accused. He contended that in the same manner, by using similar modus operandi, other 15 to 17 traders from Aurangabad were deceived by the applicants. Due to nature of aforesaid allegations, the crime was registered under the Act also.

5. The learned counsel for applicants submitted that parties, the present applicants and the first informant had arrived at an agreement and applicants had agreed to return the entire amount along with interest as the amount is fixed under compromise and major portion of the amount is already returned. He submitted that the amount of around Rs. 50 lakh is due and it will be also given by the applicants to the first informant and other traders. The learned counsel for first informant submitted that time frame was given by the first informant, but within the fixed time, the amount was not paid.

6. There are many peculiar circumstances in the present matters. Present applicants are not disputing that the amount was due from them. The submissions made show that in place of the total amount which was due to the first informant and Others, which was around Rs. 11 Crore, the amount of Rs. 2.5 Crore more was agreed to be given by the present applicants. Though the applicants are saying that this is composite amount agreed to be given as per the settleme