1 cr-apln-4382-4694-10.doc jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. APPLN NO. 4382 OF 2010 Mr. Fazal Ahmed Saheb Khan ..Applicant Vs. Mrs. Wahida Rafiq Shaikh and Anr. ..Respondents WITH CRI. APPLN. NO. 4694 OF 2010 Mrs. Waheeda Rafique Shaikh and Ors. ..Applicants Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..Respondents --- Mr. S.P.Bharti Adv. for Applicant in Cri.Appln.No. 4382 of 2010 Mr. Napolean Tuscano Adv. for respondent no.2 and applicant in Cri. Application No. 4694 of 2010 Smt.A.A.Mane APP for State --- CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned advocate for the applicants, learned advocate for the complainant and the learned APP for the State. The complainants and accused are present in Court. 2 In Cri. Application No. 4382 of 2010 the applicants 2 cr-apln-4382-4694-10.doc are original accused and the respondent no.1 is the original complainant. The applicant in Cri. Application No. 4382 of 2010 is seeking quashing of RCC No. 1246 of 2010 pending before the learned J.M.F.C. 7th Court, Thane. In Cri. Application No. 4694 of 2010 the applicants are accused and respondent no.2 is the complainant. The applicants in Cri. Application No. 4694 of 2010 are seeking quashing of M.A.No. 1552 of 2009 pending before the leaned J.M.F.C. 7th Court, Thane. The said case is under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 419, 420, 448, 452, 323, 504, 506(ii) r.w. 34 of IPC. 3 The learned advocates for the applicants state that the dispute has been amicably settled between the accused and the complainants and they do not wish to proceed any further with the cases. 4 In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 2008 SC 1969, it is observed as follows: "We need to emphasize that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly ovberburdened 3 cr-apln-4382-4694-10.doc as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law". 5 In a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Ors. reported in 1977 Cr.L.J. 1125 the Supreme Court referred to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and observed that in exercise of the wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash a proceeding if it comes to the conclusion that allowing the proceeding to continue would be an abuse of the process of the Court or that the ends of justice require that the proceeding ought to be quashed. The Supreme Court further observed that this power is designed to achieve a salutary public purpose which is that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. 6 Thus, in view of the above decisions and in view of amicable settlement between the parties, I am inclined to quash the FIRs and the proceedings relating thereto. 7 In the result, RCC No. 1246 of 2010 and M.A.No. 1552 of 2009 pending before the learned J.M.F.C. 7th Court Thane, are 4 cr-apln-4382-4694-10.doc quashed. 8 Applications disposed of. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J.]