1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1649 OF 2009 Plato Naronha and Ors. .. Applicants. Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondents. Mr.Chetan Akerkar for the applicants. Ms.Suvarna Talgote for respondent nos.2 and 3. Coram: D.B. BHOSALE, J. Dated : 3RD JULY, 2009 P.C. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this applications, the applicants have prayed for quashing of criminal case No.697/PW/2006, arising from C.R. No.555 of 2005 of MIDC police station, pending in the 22nd Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court, Andheri, Mumbai. The said crime has been registered against the applicants for having allegedly committed an offence punishable under sections 143, 146, 147, 149, 341, 342, 452, 324, 323, 506, 427 and 504 of IPC and section 7 of the Criminal Amendment Act. 3. The incident was the outcome of some dispute between 2 the management and the workers. It appears that an Industrial dispute between the parties has been amicably and peacefully resolved by way of settlement and they have filed consent terms before the Industrial Court and the Industrial Court has disposed of the dispute in terms of the consent terms. In view thereof respondent nos.2 and 3 have also agreed for termination of the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants. The complainant has filed an affidavit dated 2.4.2009 stating that they have settled the disputes and they do not wish to prosecute the criminal complaint any further against the applicants. The parties have also placed on record the consent terms arrived at and filed before the Industrial Court. In the circumstances the learned counsel for the applicants prays for quashing of the criminal case pending against them. Counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 has no objection for quashing of the proceedings. Mr.Akerkar placed reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in B.S.Joshi and Others v. State of Haryana and Anr. (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675 and the judgment of the Full Bench in Abasaheb Yadav Honmane v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. 2008(2) Mh.L.J. 856 in support of his contentions. He submitted that this court has inherent powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the complaint even if the offence is not compoundable. Having regard to the judgments relied upon by 3 the learned counsel for the applicants and having considered the fact that the parties have settled the dispute amicably this petition is made absolute in terms of prayer clause 8(i). The petition is disposed of. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)