22-crapl-779-11.doc jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 779 OF 2011 Kiran Ravilal Shah ..Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents Ms. Sunita Sharma with Mr.S.V.Marwadi for applicant Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal i/b Prakash Naik for respondent no.2 Mr. D.R.More Additional Public Prosecutor for the State CORAM : B.R.GAVAI, J. DATE : 11th AUGUST, 2011. P.C.: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of the parties. 2. By way of present application, the applicant is praying for quashing of the proceedings in Case No. 135/PW/2008 pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate, 34th Court at Vikhroli. 3. The proceedings in question are initiated at the instance of the respondent no.2 alleging therein that the present applicant had come to the place where the redevelopment 1 22-crapl-779-11.doc of the scheme was being undertaken by one Parekh builders. It is stated that the applicant threatened the complainant that if the work is continued by Parekh builders, the applicant would harass the complainant. 4. The matter has been now amicably settled between the parties. Respondent no.2 has filed affidavit reiterating the same. As a matter of fact, the respondent no.2 had in a subsequent statement to the Assistant Commissioner of Police had stated that no such threats were given by the applicant to him. The respondent no.2 is present in the Court. 5. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v/s. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582, I find that no purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending except burdening the Criminal Courts which are already overburdened. In that view of the matter, I find that in the interests of justice the criminal proceedings are required to be quashed. 6. Rule is, thus, made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (b). [ B.R.GAVAI, J. ] 2