SSK/906 1 APL 1281.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 1281 OF 2011 Milind Jaysingh Pawar ....Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents Mr. Shirish Gupte i/b. Mr. Prakash Naik, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A. P.Mundargi, senior advocate with M. K. Kocherekar, advocate for respondent no.2. Mr. A. S. Shitole, APP for the State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J. DATED : 9th DECEMBER, 2011. P.C.: Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, the petition is heard finally. 2. By way of present petition, the applicant prays for quashing the FIR dated 18th September, 2011 registered with Taloja Police Station vide C.R. No.117 of 2011 for offences under Sections 420, 341 & 447 of the IPC. The FIR in question came to be lodged at the instance of respondent no.2. The aforesaid crime came to be registered on the allegation that the applicant-accused had cheated respondent no.2-complainant in respect of certain land transactions. The matter is now amicably settled between the applicant and respondent no.2. They have, accordingly, filed a declarations SSK/906 2 APL 1281.11 at Exhibit "D" and consent terms at "Exhibit "E". The declarations as well as consent terms are signed by the applicant as well as respondent no.2. Under Clause 3 of the consent terms, it is made clear that the parties have resolved all their differences and have agreed to unconditionally withdraw all complaints, charges, allegations, imputations and claims made against each other. The applicant and respondent no.2 both are present before the Court. On being queried, they stated that they have gone through the declarations and consent terms and have understood the contents of the same. Respondent no.2 further states that he has no objection if the C.R. No.117 of 2011 is quashed and set-aside. The offences under Sections 420 and 341 are compoundable. Offence under Section 441 is also compoundable, but, with the permission of the Court. 3. 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. 4. 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 SSK/906 3 APL 1281.11 that view of the matter, I find that in the interest of justice the criminal proceedings are required to be quashed. However, at the same time, costs need to be saddled on the parties for setting in motion the police machinery for settling their dispute. 5. Rule is, thus, made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) & (b), however, subject to costs quantified in the sum of Rs. 5,000/-. Costs to be paid by the applicant by drawing demand draft in the name of Police Welfare Fund, Mumbai Police, Mumbai. The said demand draft be deposited with the office of the Public Prosecutor, High Court, Mumbai within a period of two weeks from today and receipt thereof be placed on the record of the present matter. (RANJIT MORE, J.)