The petitioner (Accused No. 3) sought quashing of criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 11 of 2008 before the XI Additional Special Court for CBI Cases, Chennai, where he was charged along with others for criminal conspiracy to cheat Canara Bank by discounting 59 bills using false invoices, fraudulently arranging a guarantor with an inflated property valuation, and filling cheques in the names of non-existing persons, causing a loss of approximately Rs. 28.58 lakhs to the bank. The petitioner argued that the entire outstanding amount had been recovered by the bank through sale of property and a One-Time Settlement (OTS) scheme, with full satisfaction recorded before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The Madras High Court considered several Supreme Court precedents, including a judgment in the petitioner's own identical CBI proceedings (N.S. Gnaneshwaran v. Inspector of Police, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1257), where the Supreme Court had held that no useful purpose would be served by continuing criminal proceedings once the bank had received the entire outstanding amount under OTS and no residual claim survived. Following these precedents, the High Court found that the dispute was predominantly civil/commercial in nature and that continuation of proceedings would cause undue oppression to the petitioner.