Karnataka High Court:<\/strong> While passing the order in a criminal petition filed under Section 482 of CrPC, a Single Judge Bench of Aravind Kumar, J. held that in light of the parties having entered into settlement, the Court was of considered view that continuation of proceedings would not sub-serve the ends of justice and it would be an abuse of process of law.<\/p>\n

The petitioner was seeking to quash the proceedings pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, in a criminal case for the offence punishable under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. He contended that the Management and the Employees Union have entered into a settlement and as such the proceedings may be quashed.<\/p>\n

Learned advocates appearing for the parties filed a joint memorandum of settlement entered into between the parties. The parties were present before the court and the complainant submitted that he had no objection to the proceedings being quashed. The parties submitted that they had entered into the settlement out of their own free will and volition.<\/p>\n

In light of the parties having entered into settlement and the submissions made by the complainant, the Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings pending before the MM. Accordingly, the Court acquitted the accused of the offence punishable under Section 29 of IDA, 1947. [Ashok Mathur v. Sri P.I. Antoo, Criminal Petition No. 4868\/2014, dated August 14, 2017]<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Karnataka High Court: While passing the order in a criminal petition filed under Section 482 of CrPC, a Single Judge Bench of <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":109081,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[21654,3587],"class_list":["post-151264","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-industrial-disputes-act","tag-settlement"],"yoast_head":"\n