suit and the 2nd respondent has also agreed to withdraw all the cases as against the petitioner and others, as per the memorandum of understanding and Tripartite agreement, if any condition is breached by the parties to agreement, the aggrieved party can initiate appropriate proceedings as per law. Therefore, the 2nd respondent is at liberty to approach the appropriate forum for execution of decree if any condition is breached. Since the nature of allegations are civil in nature and already a Civil Suit was filed and compromise decree had been passed, it is not appropriate to continue the criminal proceedings only because some of the terms of agreement have not been complied by some of the parties. Even on merits, there is no offence is made out as against the petitioner, since, this petitioner is only an attesting witness for the sale of the property and the matter is civil in nature. Therefore, there are no materials to constitute the offence under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506(i) of IPC as against this petitioner. Therefore, the pending proceedings as against the petitioner in C.C. No.7019 of 2018 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Land Grabbing Special Court-II, Chennai are liable to be quashed. Though the case was initially pending
