1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2656 OF 2009 Vipul Chotulal Ghelani & Ors. : Applicants V/s. Prasanna Deshmukh & Anr. : Respondents ... Mr.M.S. Mohite for the applicants. Ms Sharmila Kaushik for respondent no.1. Ms M.H. Mhatre, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. ... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 01, 2009. P.C.: 1. The applicants-accused have applied for quashing the further investigation in C.R.No.17/2009 on the ground that the dispute is settled between the parties. The learned counsel for the respondent no.1- complainant appears and states on instructions from the complainant who is present in Court that the matter has been settled as stated by the applicant and, therefore, joins in the prayer for quashing. The dispute apparently arose in respect of accounts of the company in the course of business between the complainant and the accused-applicants. The nature of the dispute is thus private and the society at large is not concerned with it. In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Madan Mohan 2 Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Manoj Sharma v. State & Ors. (MANU/SC/8182/2008 = 2008 (4) KLT 417 (SC), I am of view that it is a fit case where the dispute having been compromised by the parties, the investigation is liable to be quashed and it is, accordingly, quashed. 2. The Criminal Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A) which reads as follows:- “A) The FIR lodged vide C.R.No.17/2009 registered at Economic Offences Wing, Mumbai, and consequent proceedings be quashed.” S.A. BOBDE, J.