1 mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1143 OF 2009 Ranjit Mohan and others Applicants versus State of Maharashtra and another Respondents Anoop Pandey i/by Smt.Manjula Rao for applicants. Ms.V.C.Khatri i/by M/s.Vijay Kumar & Co. for respondent no.2. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 09th June 2009 PC : 1. Rule. Learned APP waives service for the first respondent. The advocate for second respondent also waives service. 2. By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Code”) a prayer is made for quashing the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR lodged by the second respondent alleging commission of offences punishable under sections 323, 504, 341, 342 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code. 2 3. An application was made before the learned Magistrate seeking leave for withdrawal of the case on the ground of settlement arrived between the concerned parties in a suit filed on the original side of this Court. The said application was not entertained as offence alleged under section 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code is not compoundable. 4. Reliance has been placed on a compromise recorded in Suit No.3392 of 2005 filed on the original side of this Court. The prayer for quashing is made on the basis of the terms of settlement forming part of the compromise. The second respondent (first informant) has tendered an affidavit on record confirming that there was complete settlement and in fact the concerned Police Station was informed about the settlement. 5. A perusal of the FIR shows that essentially the dispute between the parties was a dispute relating to the property. Now, there is complete settlement between the parties. Therefore, the chances of conviction are very bleak. Apart from that, now no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution. As stated earlier, except section 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, all other offences are compoundable. 3 6. In the circumstances, considering the peculiar facts, a case is made out for exercising the power under section 482 of the said Code. Hence, I pass following order :- (a) Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (A.S.OKA, J.)