KBP 1 cr.wp.2867-11.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2867 OF 2011 Rajendra Bhagawan Londhe and ors. ..Petitioners Vs The State of Maharashtra and another ..Respondent -- Mr.V.V.Purwant, for petitioner. Ms.A.S.Pai, APP for respondent no.1. Mr.Sachin Deokar, for respondent no.2. -- CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 24 th NOVEMBER, 2011 P.C.: Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith, by consent of the parties. KBP 2 cr.wp.2867-11.odt 2] This petition is for quashing F.I.R. dated 6 th June, 2009 registered at Tembhurni Police Station, District Solapur bearing C.R.No.94 of 2009. The complaint was regarding snatching of Rs. 18,400/- by the petitioner from the complainant forcibly. It is noticed that the petitioner and respondent no.2 – complainant were friends and after some altercation, the petitioner snatched away cash of Rs. 18,400/- from the complainant. 3] The petitioner and respondent no.2 have amicably resolved all their differences. As a matter of fact, their dispute was taken before the `Tanta Mukti Samiti’ on 15 th July, 2010 which Committee advised both the parties to amicably resolve their differences. The petitioner as well as respondent no.2 have decided to act upon the said advise given by the Committee, as a result of which, respondent no.2 is not interested in pursuing the criminal case against the petitioner any further. 4] Considering the fact that the incident in question is essentially arising out of private dispute and if the parties settle their differences, it may not have any impact on the public policy as such. In the KBP 3 cr.wp.2867-11.odt interest of justice, taking overall view of the matter, we accede to the joint request made by the petitioner and respondent no.2 - complainant to quash the F.I.R. dated 6 th June, 2009 registered at Tembhurni Police Station, District Solapur bearing C.R.No.94 of 2009. The learned APP had stated that there is no information as to whether there are any other antecedents reported against the petitioner. 5] Accordingly, Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Petition is disposed of. [R.G.KETKAR, J.] [A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.]