ORDER : BIREN VAISHNAV, J. Present application has been filed for quashing and setting aside the FIR in CR No. II-28/2011 lodged with the Godhra Police ‘A’ Division by the respondent No. 2. The complainant had filed a complaint alleging offences under punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. Mr. Vishal Patel, learned advocate for Mr. Parthiv Shah, learned advocate for the applicant, has drawn my attention to an agreement dated 14.08.2012 by which it was agreed between the parties that the applicant and complainant, respondent No. 2 that sum of Rs. 16 lakhs will be paid to the respondent NO. 2-original complainant. 3. By an order dated 20.09.2013 passed by this Court, statement was made by learned advocate Mr. Parthiv Shah appearing for the applicant that a sum of Rs. 8 lakhs has already been paid to the respondent No. 2 and the remaining sum of Rs. 8 lakhs will be deposited in the Registry of this Court. The order dated 20.09.2013, reads as under: “Mr. Parthiv Shah, learned advocate for the applicant, has pointed out that in terms of the agreement dated 14th August, 2012 between the parties, a sum of Rs. 8 lakhs has already been paid to the respondent No. 2 and that a sum of Rs. 8 lakhs remained to be paid. That the applicant herein is ready and willing to deposit the remaining amount of Rs. 8 lakhs with the registry of this court. This court has also heard Mr. Darshan Dave, learned advocate for respondent No. 2. Having regard to the allegations made in the first information report and in the light of the agreement arrived at between the parties, by way of interim relief, all proceedings pursuant to the first information report registered vide Godhra Town ‘A Police Station II-C.R No. 28 of 2011, are hereby stayed qua the applicant subject to his depositing a sum of Rs. 8 lakhs on or before 30th September, 2013 with the registry of this court. Stand over to 18th October, 2013. Direct service is permitted.” 4. In view of the settlement made by the learned advocate for the applicant, the applicant had deposited the remaining amount of Rs. 8 lakhs by way of demand draft in the Registry of this Court. 8 lakhs on or before 30th September, 2013 with the registry of this court. Stand over to 18th October, 2013. Direct service is permitted.” 4. In view of the settlement made by the learned advocate for the applicant, the applicant had deposited the remaining amount of Rs. 8 lakhs by way of demand draft in the Registry of this Court. The amount as per the order was invested in a fixed deposit. Mr. Darshan Dave, learned advocate for the original complainant states that, he agrees to the complaint being quashed on a condition that the amount of Rs. 8 lakhs deposited in the Registry pursuant to the order dated 20.09.2013, together with accrued interest is released in favour of the respondent No. 2. This statement is made under the instructions of respondent No. 2. In view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, the FIR being CR NO. I-28 of 2011 registered before the Godhra Police ‘A’ Division is hereby quashed and set aside. 5. Respondent No. 2, original complainant-Hardi, daughter of Rajendra Shah, is permitted to withdraw an amount of Rs. 8 lakhs together with the accrued interest thereon deposited in the Registry of this Court. The Registry shall issue a banker's cheque in the name of the respondent No. 2 of the amount so deposited together with the interest accrued thereon and pay the same to the respondent No. 2. The Registry shall ensure that the banker's cheque in the name of respondent No. 2 is be handed over to the Counsel of the respondent No. 2, who shall with a note enclose a receipt of the respondent no. 2 having received the cheque. On such note being filed, the Registry shall issue cheque as directed. For the foregoing reasons, the FIR being CR. NO. II-28 of 2011 lodged with Godhra Town ‘A’ Division Police Station, District: Panchmahals and all consequential proceedings are hereby quashed and set aside. This application is allowed in the above terms. Rule is made absolute to the above extent.