JUDGMENT A. B. CHAUDHARI, J. :- Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of the learned counsel for the rival parties. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant and the learned counsel for the non-applicant no.2 submits that the F.I.R. that was registered at the behest of the non-applicant no.2 against the applicant related to a money transaction. The applicant and non-applicant no.2 have arrived at a compromise and the said money transaction has been settled. The applicant as well as the non-applicant no.2 are present in the Court. They are identified by their respective counsel. 3. Affidavit-in-reply dated 20/11/2013 has been filed by the respondent no.2. We have seen the said affidavit. Having heard the learned counsel for the rival parties, we are of the opinion that since the dispute being purely of a civil nature and since both the contesting parties have arrived at a settlement there is no reason to continue with the prosecution against the applicant. That being so, we are inclined to allow this application recording compromise in view of the decision in case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 : (2013 ALLSCR 1711. Hence the following order. ORDER (i) The Criminal Application (APL) No.558/2013 is disposed of recording compromise between the applicant and non-applicant no.2. The F.I.R. No. 183/2007 dated 10/7/2007 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 511 of the Indian Penal Code and the chargesheet in Criminal Case No.3761/2007 are quashed and set aside. (ii) Rule is made absolute in above terms. No costs. Application allowed.