1 (crim wp 2833 of 2010) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2833 OF 2010 Parikshit (Pintoo) Bhupendra Panchal and Anr. ...Petitioners Vs. Chetan Shantilal Chheda and Anr. ...Respondents ----- Mr.S.V. Marwadi i/b. Mr.V.V. Katti for the Petitioner Mr.K.P. Sangai for Respondent No.1 Mrs.M.H.Mhatre – APP for the State ----- CORAM: V.M. KANADE J. DATED: 1ST OCTOBER,2010 P.C. 1. The Petitioners have filed this petition for quashing the criminal complaint filed by the Respondent No.1 for the offences punishable under section 408, 420 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code which is registered by the Dongri Police Station vide C.R. No. 58/2010. 2. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.1 has filed affidavit in reply of the Respondent NO.1 and in the said affidavit, he has stated that the parties have amicably settled the 2 (crim wp 2833 of 2010) dispute and he has no objection if the complaint is quashed. 3. Since the dispute is personal one between the parties and it would be appropriate if the complaint is quashed by exercising inherent powers of this Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C. The Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2003 SC 1386 and in the case of Jagdish Chanana vs. State of Haryana reported in AIR 2008 SC 1968 has held that the High Court can take recourse to the provisions of 482 of Cr.P.C. in such cases where both the parties have filed the consent terms. The Respondent No.1 is present in the Court and he has no objection if the complaint is quashed. 4. Hence, petition is allowed and is made absolute in terms of prayer clause 8(b). Writ petition is disposed of. (V.M. KANADE J.)