1 apl.643.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Application No. 643 of 2011 Sagar Umrotkar & anr. ....Applicants v/s. State of Maharashtra & anr. ....Respondents Mr. Sagar G. Talekar for the applicants. Mr. A.S.Shitole-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 18th July, 2011 PC: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioners are praying for quashing and setting aside the Criminal Case No. 753/PW/2009 for the offence punishable under Section 379 read with 34 of IPC. 3. The aforesaid criminal proceedings were initiated at the instance of respondent no.2 initially on an allegation that he had parked his motor cycle at Andheri and gone to Goa. However, it is alleged that after his return he found that the motor cycle was not there and as such the complaint was lodged for theft of motor cycle. 4. The parties have settled the matter. Respondent No.2-Complainant who is personally present has also filed an affidavit stating that he does not wish to proceed with the complaint. 2 apl.643.11.sxw 5. 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. 6. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v.. 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. 7. In that view of the matter, I find that in the interests of justice the criminal proceedings are required to be quashed. Rule is, thus, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (b). (B.R. GAVAI, J)