1 wp519.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Writ Petition No. 519 of 2011 Mr. Goria Vijendra Dilip Jaiswal ....Petitioner v/s. Mr. Nitesh Mallah & anr. ....Respondents Ms. Kiran Singh for the petitioner. Mr. Sujit Phatak for respondent no.1. Mr. A.S. Shitole-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 4th July, 2011 PC: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The petitioners have filed the present petition praying for quashing the FIR registered vide Crime No. 59/2011 with Goregaon Police station for the offence punishable under Section 326, 323 read with 34 of IPC. 3. The FIR is registered on the basis of information given by the respondent no.2. The petitioner as well as respondent no.1 are both vegetable vendors. It is the case of the respondent no.1 in the FIR that on the date of incident there was some altercation and the petitioner assaulted him. The matter has been amicably settled between the parties. It is stated that both are old friends and that they do not propose to proceed further with the criminal proceedings. The Respondent no.1 is present in the Court. He reiterates the same. The affidavit has also been filed by him stating the same. 2 wp519.11.sxw 4. It can, thus, be seen that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. From the perusal of the complaint it would reveal that the allegations are totally personal in nature. There is no element of public law involved in the crime. 5. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v/s. 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. 6. Rule is, thus, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (i). (B.R. GAVAI, J)