ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. Notice has been issued in this matter as it is clear that a final Settlement dated 04.10.2007 was entered into between the appellant and the Respondent No.2 for a sum of Rs.48,00,000/- (Rupees Forty Eight Lakhs only). Eight cheques were given in pursuance of this Settlement, which when presented, were all returned by the Bank. 3. Consequently, an F.I.R of 16.10.2008 was lodged in which it is made clear that the appellant, who is a lady entrepreneur, has been duped by Respondent No.2. The respondent No.2, as has been recorded in the order dated 05.10.2016 of the Additional Sessions Judge, instead of abiding by the Settlement, withdrew whatever money was lying in his account and closed the same. Bail was accordingly rejected by the aforesaid order. However, by the impugned judgment of 06.12.2016, the High Court interfered with the aforesaid well-reasoned order and granted bail to Respondent No.2 4. We are of the view that the order dated 05.10.2016 was correct in law and should not have been interfered with by the High Court. We, therefore, set aside the order of the High Court. 5. The appeal is accordingly allowed. 6. The respondent No.2 is given one week's time within which he should surrender.