IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL/CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.1197-1199 OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) Nos.35-37 of 2005)

Kantilal S. Mehta & Ors.        ...Appellant(s)

Versus

R. Nandev & Ors.       ...Respondent(s)

W I T H

Civil Appeal No.4754 OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.17124 of 2008)

O  R  D  E  R

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Leave granted.

A  perusal  of  the  records  show  that  Criminal  Petition  Nos.5273/2000,

5345/2000, 5342/2000 and 5380/2000 filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the

Code  of  Criminal  Procedure  for  quashing  the  proceedings  of  CC Nos.1744/1999,

1745/1999,  1746/1999  and  1747/1999  pending  in  the  Court  of  XIth  Metropolitan

Magistrate, Secunderabad, were dismissed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh vide

common order  dated  22.7.2004.  That  order has  been challenged  in  these  appeals,

except insofar as it pertains to Criminal Petition No.5380 of 2000 because petitioner of

that case has not challenged the High Court’s refusal to quash the proceedings of the

criminal

....2/-

- 2 -

case. Another case registered as CC No.789 of 2001 is also pending in the Court of

XIth Metropolitan Magistrate, Secunderabad. Apart from the criminal cases, Civil

Suit bearing O.S. No.170/1999 filed by some of the non-petitioners is pending in the

Court of Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Secunderabad.  In that case, the

petitioners filed an application for grant of leave to defend, which was dismissed by

the Trial  Court.   CRP No.794/2001 filed  against  the order of  the trial  Court  was

partly allowed by the High Court and leave to defend was granted subject  to the

condition of deposit of 50% amount claimed by the plaintiffs. That order is under

challenge in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.17124 of 2008.

Learned counsel  for the appellants  stated that the disputes between the

parties  in  all  the  four  complaint  cases  as  well  as  the  suit  have  been  settled  and,

pursuant to the settlement, entire money has been paid to the complainants of the

complaint cases and the plaintiffs of the civil suit.  He also stated that Memorandum

of Understanding has been entered into by the parties, original of which has been

filed in this Court along with an affidavit.   

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had taken time on

the last occasion to seek instruction from his clients.  Today, he stated that his clients

have not given the required instructions and, therefore, he is not in a position to make

any statement.  

We  have  gone  through  the  Memorandum  of  Understanding  and  are

satisfied that the parties have settled their disputes and as such, it would be just and

expedient to quash the prosecution of the accused persons in all the four cases to meet

the ends of justice in spite of the fact that dismissal of Criminal Petition No.5380/2000

has not been challenged before this Court. We are also satisfied that proceedings of

CC No.789/2001 deserve to be quashed.

....3/-

- 3 -

In the result, we allow the criminal appeals and quash proceedings of all

the accused persons in CC Nos.1744/1999, 1745/1999, 1746/1999, 1747/1999 pending

in  the  Court  of  XIth Metropolitan  Magistrate,  Secunderabad,  within  the  State  of

Andhra Pradesh.  The proceedings of CC No.789/2001 pending in that Court are also

quashed.

So  far  as  the  civil  suit  is  concerned,  prayer  has  been  made  in  the

Memorandum of Understanding for its withdrawal. In view of this, civil suit bearing

O.S. No.170 of 1999, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court

at Secunderabad, within the State of Andhra Pradesh is transferred to this Court and

is disposed of as withdrawn.  

Accordingly, the criminal appeals and the civil appeal are disposed of.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, August 01, 2008.