AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 169 wordsJ.K. Mehra, J.
(1) I have perused the petition for quashing and also have kept in view the Explanation given by the accused who has since been re-employed by the complainant after the alleged removal of misunderstanding and compromise between the complainant and the accused. The recovery of money was affected by police following the complaint by petitioner No. 1. However, in view of the mutual settlement and keeping in view the fact that almost the entire amount has since been recovered and can be restored to petitioner No. 1, I do not see if any useful purpose will be served in continuing with the prosecution. Accordingly, I allow the petition and grant permission for compounding the offence and pursuant thereto hereby quash the Fir No. 9/96 registered on 17.1.96 with P.S. Chandni Chowk, Delhi against petitioners 2 and 3 u/s 408, Indian Penal Code and all proceedings emanating there from. The amount recovered be restored to petitioner No. 1. This petition stands disposed of in the above terms.