The court may quash criminal proceedings if there is an amicable resolution between the parties, preventing abuse of process of law.

ORDER :

1. Learned advocate Mr. Arbaazkhan A. Pathan appears and submits that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the respondent no.2 - complainant. The Registry shall accept his vakalatnama.

2. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the judgment and order dated 23.05.2025 passed by the learned 6^th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara, in Criminal Case No. 14989 of 2021, for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.

3. Today, when the matter is called out, the complainant, who is virtually present before this Court, has produced his identity proof as well as the affidavit which are ordered to be taken on record. In the said affidavit, the complainant has categorically stated that he has received his dues and the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. The complainant has further stated that he has no grievance or ill-will against the applicant.

4. Considering the issue involved in the present application as well as considering the fact that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties, with the consent of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present application is taken up for final disposal.

5. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Ms. Asmita Patel waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 – State and learned advocate Mr. Arbaazkhan A. Pathan waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 – complainant.

6. The complainant, who is virtually present in the Court, has categorically stated before this Court that the dispute has been resolved between the parties and he has no objection if the application is allowed and the impugned judgment and order is quashed and set-aside.

7. The relevant paragraphs of the affidavit filed by the complainant: Mr. Abhijeet Prakash Shirke, Authorised Officer of Shree Chatrapati Shivaji Sahakari Mandali Ltd. read thus :

“ 1. I respectfully submit that I have lodged the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act vide Criminal Case No. 14989 of 2021 for the amount of Rs. 2,21,000/- and applicant herein is convicted on 23.05.2025 and thereby present application has been filed before this Honourable Court by the present applicant.

2. I respondent no. 2 – complainant herein stated that the applicant herein has given all money as per the cheque amount and now compromise arrived between parties that is why I do not want to carry litigation further more and I have no objection if this Honourable Court will quash and set aside order passed by the learned 6^th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vadodara in the interest of justice.

3. I have no objection if this criminal complaint and conviction in the Criminal Case will be quashed and set aside and by allowing present application by this Hon’ble Court as the matter is amicably settled between both the parties.”

8. Thus, it appears from the aforesaid that to continue further with the proceedings pursuant to the impugned judgment and order would be a futile exercise and the same would amount to abuse of process of law.

9. Having heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, as well as considering the facts and circumstances arising out of the present application and also taking into consideration the decisions rendered in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303 , Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab , (2008) 4 SCC 582 , Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. 2009 (1) GLH 31 , Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors. 2009 (1) GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2014 (2) Crime 67 (SC) as well as State of Haryana Vs. Bhajanlal , AIR 1992 SC 604 , it appears that conti