S.S.SHINDE, MANISH PITALE
Vineet Kumar Balkrishna – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.S. SHINDE, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard with the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. Learned counsel appearing for applicants and Respondent No. 2 jointly submits that the applicants and Respondent No. 2 have amicably settled the dispute and to that effect, the affidavit is filed by Respondent No. 2.
3. The parties are identified by their respective advocates. On 13.01.2021 the applicants were present in the Court. On interaction with the applicants, they have stated that they are doing their respective jobs and they have not indulged in any such alleged activities.
4. The Respondent No. 2 is present before this Court. He stated that it is his voluntary act to enter into such settlement and give no objection for quashing the impugned FIR. He stated that the pillow covers and bed sheets were given for cleaning and those were not returned by the applicants, therefore out of misunderstanding the impugned FIR was registered.
5. Since the applicants and Respondent No. 2 have amicably settled the dispute and Respondent No. 2 has no
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.