Criminal proceedings arising from financial disputes may be quashed under the inherent powers of the court if the parties reach an amicable settlement and the complainant no longer has any grievance, as continuing such proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law.

ORAL ORDER

1. By way of filing the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants- accused have prayed to quash and set-aside the First Information Report No.1 of 2005 registered with the CID Crime Police Station, District - Gandhinagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as the proceedings of the Special Case (ACB) No.28 of 2017 pending before the Special Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, Navrangpura, District – Ahmedabad, so also all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.

2. The present application was filed on merits, however, during the pendency of the matter, the dispute has been resolved between the parties, since both the applicants have deposited the due amount as per the One Time Settlement proposal offered by the respondent – Bank.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Nandish Chudgar appearing for the respondent no.2 - complainant has submitted the afÏdavit dated 20.04.2026 filed by the authorized ofÏcer of the respondent – Bank, namely, Mr. Nurmohmed Suma s/o Bhadurbhai Suma. The same is ordered to be taken on record.

4. Today, when the matter is called out, the authorized ofÏcer of the respondent – Bank, namely, Mr. Nurmohmed Suma s/o Bhadurbhai Suma, is personally present before this Court and has produced his identity proof, which is ordered to be taken on record. In the said afÏdavit, he has categorically stated that he has received his dues of Rs.75,00,000/- and the dispute has been amicably resolved with the applicants. The complainant has further stated that he has no grievance or ill-will against the applicants.

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

6. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr. Tirthraj Pandya waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.1 – State and learned advocate Mr. Nandish Chudgar waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent no.2 – complainant.

7. The authorized ofÏcer of the respondent – Bank, who is personally present before this Court, has categorically stated that the dispute has been amicably resolved between the parties and he has no objection if the application is allowed and the impugned FIR as well as the proceedings of the special case are quashed and set-aside.

8. The relevant paragraphs of the afÏdavit filed by the authorized ofÏcer of the respondent – Bank, namely, Mr. Nurmohmed Suma s/o Bhadurbhai Suma, read thus :

“4. I state on behalf of the Respondent Bank on affidavit dated 18.02.2026 was filed in furtherance thereto. I state that the Petitioner No. 1 was also a Director of M/s Gayatri Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. The Directors of Gayatri Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. were (1) Pravinchandra Nathalal Shah (2) Keyur Pravinchandra Shah (3) Manish Pravinchandra Shah. The said company was granted of term loan of Rs. 1 crore. The said company i.e. the borrower had hot made the payment in time. However, the said company i.e. Gayatri Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. enter into a one-time settlement under the compromise settlement scheme known as FSS-2016 and made the payment of the settlement amount to the bank. Accordingly, Respondent No. 2 issued a "nil certificate" in favour of M/s Gayatri Intermediate Pvt. Ltd. on 13.06.2019. Annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-R/3 is a copy of said certificate dated 13.06.2019.

5. So far as Petitioner No. 1 is concerned. He was also Direct