IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
  
  CRL.M.C. 683/2009
  
  ABDULLAH AZIZ and ORS. ..... Petitioners
  Through: Mr.R.M.Tufail with Mr.Anwar A.Khan and
  Mr.Vishal Sehijpal, Advocates.
  
  
versus
  
  
  
  STATE and ORS. ..... Respondents
  Through: Mr.Manoj Ohri, APP for State/R-1 with IO
  SI Mukesh Kumar.
  Mr.N.Hari Haran, Advocate for R-2 with
  Mr.Rakesh Luthra, A.R of R-2 Company.
  
  CORAM:
   HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL
  
   O R D E R
   06.04.2009
  
  By this writ petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioners seek
  quashing of FIR bearing No.370/2005 under Sections 408/420/120-B IPC and 66 of
  the Information Technology Act registered at Police Station Anand Vihar and all
  proceedings arising out of the said FIR.
  2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 07.07.2005 a
  complaint was received through Mr.Ranjeet Singh, Secretary of Parsec
  Technologies Ltd. at the Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, EOW, Qutab
  Institutional Area, New Delhi for criminal breach of trust, fraud and cheating
  with the complainant company (respondent No.2 herein). On the basis of the said
  complaint, case FIR No.370/2005 under Sections 409/420/120-B IPC and 66 of the
  I.T. Act was registered against the petitioners with Police Station Anand Vihar,
  Delhi. The petitioners were arrested by the police but subsequently admitted to
  bail by the Court.
  3. During the pendency of the proceedings, a settlement was arrived at
  between the complainant company and the petitioners, in terms of which the
  complainant company/respondent No.2 agreed not to proceed with its complaint
  against the petitioners. The counsel for the respondent No.2, who is present in
  Court along with the Authorized Representative of the respondent No.2 company,
  states that the respondent No.2 company has now no grievance left against the
  petitioners and is not interested in pursuing the complaint any longer.
  3. Notice of the petition was issued to the State as well. In response to
  the said notice, the respondent No.1/State has filed a status report stating
  that the case is pending trial.
  4. Statement of Shri Rakesh Luthra, Senior Administrative Officer of the
  respondent No.2 company was recorded by this Court on 6th April, 2009. In his
  said statement, he has stated that the dispute between the petitioners and the
  respondent No.2 company had been amicably settled vide settlement deed dated
  12.02.2009 and that the respondent No.2 company has no objection to the quashing
  of the FIR in question against the petitioners.
  5. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioners and the respondent No.2
  company have amicably resolved all their disputes, in my view, continuance of
  the criminal proceedings against the petitioners would be an exercise in
  futility, which could only result in wastage of the time of the Court and
  expense to the public exchequer. Consequently, FIR bearing No.370/2005 under
  Sections 408/420/120-B IPC and 66 of the Information Technology Act registered
  at Police Station Anand Vihar and all proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby
  quashed.
  6. CRL.M.C. 683/2009 stands disposed of accordingly, leaving the parties
  to bear their own costs.
  Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties as prayed.
  
  
  REVA KHETRAPAL,J
  APRIL 06, 2009
  
  
  dc
  I-31