vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3436 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3436 OF 2007 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.3436 OF 2007 Rajendra Maruti Mane ... Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.A.P. Mundargi i/b S.D. Dharmadhikari for Applicant Mrs.A.A. Mane, APP, for Respondent No.1 Mr.G.M. Savagave for Respondent No.2 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: APRIL 3, 2008 APRIL 3, 2008 APRIL 3, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . This application has been filed to quash the proceedings in SCC No.466/2007. The complaint of Respondent No.2 dated 12.4.2007 alleges that while he was on duty as Clerk in the Municipal Council, Jaisingpur, engaged in supervision of the cleanliness drive undertaken by the Municipal Council, the applicant threatened and obstructed him while carrying out his duties. An altercation took place. However, the quarrel was amicably settled immediately thereafter. Despite this, a complaint was lodged vide C.R. No.34 of 2007 under section 353 of the Indian Penal Code. The chargesheet has also been filed in the said proceeding. 2. However, both the parties have settled the dispute as averred in the affidavit of the respondent : 2 : placed on record. The applicant therefore prays that the complaint dated 12.4.2007 and the order dated 25.5.2007 issuing proces in SCC No.466/2007 be quashed. 3. The Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v/s. State of Punjab, (Criminal Appeal No.555 of (Criminal Appeal No.555 of (Criminal Appeal No.555 of 2008) 2008) 2008) decided on 26.3.2008 has observed thus: 5. It is on the basis of this compromise that the application was filed in the High Court for quashing of proceedings which has been dismissed by the impugned order. We notice from the reading of the FIR and the other documents on record that the dispute was purely a personal one between two contesting parties and that it arose out of extensive business dealings between them and that there was absolutely no public policy involved in the nature of the allegations made against the accused. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the light of the compromise and also in the light of the fact that the complainant has, on 11th January 2004, passed away and the possibility of a conviction being recorded has thus to be ruled out. We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of law. We see from the impugned order that the learned Judge has confused a compounding of an offence with the quashing of proceedings. The outer limit of Rs.250/- which has led to the dismissal of the application is an irrelevant factor in the later case. We accordingly allow : 3 : the appeal and in the peculiar facts of the case, direct that FIR No.155 dated 17th November 2001 P.S. Kotwali, Amritsar and all proceedings connected therewith shall be deemed to be quashed." 4. In the present case also, the complainant has averred in his affidavit dated 11.12.2007 that he and the applicant have settled their differences amicably and have no grievance against each other. The dispute being a purely personal one, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the litigation alive in view of the compromise arrived at between the Applicant and the Complainant. In this view of the matter and in the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the application is allowed. The complaint dated 12.4.2007 and the process issued in SCC No.466/2007 2007 as well as all the connected proceedings are deemed to be quashed and set aside. 6. Criminal application stands disposed of accordingly.