1 appln.5557.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Application No. 5557 OF 2010 Mr. Mohammed Yusuf Mohammed Yaqoob and others. ... Applicants. V/s. State of Maharashtra and others. ... Respondents. WITH Criminal Application No. 5558 of 2010 Manzoor Alam and others. ... Applicants. V/s. State of Maharashtra and others. ... Respondents. Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal for the applicants (in Crim.Appln.No.5557/10) and for respondent Nos.2 and 3 (in Crim.Appln.No.5558/10) Ms.Sharmila Kaushik for the applicants (in Crim.Appln.No.5558/10) and for respondent Nos.2 to 5 (in Crim.Appln.No.5557/10) Mr. Y. M. Nakhawa-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R.GAVAI, J. DATED : 30th June 2011. P.C. : Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of parties. 2. The applicants have filed these applications for quashing criminal proceedings filed by the rival parties against each other. 3. In Criminal Application No.5557/2010, the applicant are praying for quashing C.C.No.209/PW/2008 arising out of C.R.No.104/2007 lodged by respondent No.2 therein for the offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 452, 326, 324, 504 and 506(II) of I.P.C. 2 appln.5557.10 4. In Criminal Application No.5558/2010, the applicants are praying for quashing of C.C.No.79/PW/2008 arising out of C.R.No.105/2007 lodged by respondent No.2 therein for the offence punishable under section 326 of I.P.C. Applicant No.4 in Criminal Application No.5557/2010 is respondent No.2- complainant in Criminal Application No.5558/2010 whereas applicant No.1 in Criminal Application No.5558/2010 is respondent No.2- complainant in Criminal Application No.5557/2010. 5. The incident appears to have occurred on account of dispute between the groups over possession of one block in the family. 6. The parties have now settled the dispute. The affidavits have been filed by the complainants in both th applications stating therein that the parties have settled the disputes and that they have no grievance against each other. From the perusal of the complaints it would reveal that the allegations are totally personal in nature. There is no element of public law involved in the crime. 7. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v.. 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. However, at the same time, the costs need to be saddled on the parties for setting in motion the police machinery for settling their dispute. Rule in both these applications is, thus, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (B.R.GAVAI, J.)