ORDER : 1. The original complainant Hafiz Mohd. Nabijan was an ex-employee of Tata Iron & Steel Company (TISCO). The genesis of the present controversy is the allegation made by him when in execution of decree of possession the decree-holder Company with police aid was trying to take possession of the Company's quarter from him. The complaint filed was that the accused/appellants herein took away his articles worth Rs. 44,000/- in that process. That was complaint case No.217/1989 in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Chas at Chas (Dhanbad). The application filed by the appellants for discharge under Section 245 of Criminal Procedure Code was dismissed by the trial magistrate. Criminal Revision No.129/1994(R) was dismissed by the High Court which judgment is impugned in the present appeal. 2. During the pendency of this appeal Hafiz Mohd. Nabijan has expired. He died on 13th June, 2002. His legal representatives have been brought on record and are represented by learned counsel. Learned counsel for legal representatives of respondent no.2, i.e., respondent nos.2(a) to (c) submits that he has instructions to make a statement that in case the Company pays to them a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lacs) they would not press the complaint and accept that amount by way of full and complete settlement of what was alleged by the original respondent no.2. Mr. RF Nariman, learned counsel for the appellants accepts this proposal and states that the payment would be made within a period of four weeks. 3. In our prima facie view, on facts, it is an appropriate case where an order of discharge ought to have been made in favour of the appellants. We, however, need not go into that question. In view of the proposal of the respondents which has since been accepted by the appellants, the respondents have also no objection if an order of discharge of the appellants under Section 245, Criminal Procedure Code is made. 4. In view of the aforesaid the TISCO Company will deposit a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- (rupees two lacs) for payment to respondent nos.2(a) to (c). It is agreed between learned counsel for the parties that the aforesaid sum of Rs. 2 lacs will be deposited by TISCO in this Court within a period of four weeks, whereafter it will be withdrawn by respondent nos.2(a) to (c). 2,00,000/- (rupees two lacs) for payment to respondent nos.2(a) to (c). It is agreed between learned counsel for the parties that the aforesaid sum of Rs. 2 lacs will be deposited by TISCO in this Court within a period of four weeks, whereafter it will be withdrawn by respondent nos.2(a) to (c). The appellants are discharged from the complaint filed against them and the appeal stands allowed in these terms.