-: 1 :- apl-1239 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPL. NO. 1239 OF 2011 Lynn Deas. ..Applicants. Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr ..Respondents. Apoorva V. Singh for the applicant. K. T. Kukreja i/b Devang Shah for R-2. Mr. Rajesh More, APP. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : November 30, 2011. P. C. : 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. The Complainant has filed this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing and setting aside Criminal Case No. 49/SW/2003 pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court, Girgaum, Mumbai. The applicant/Complainant filed said complaint case against Respondent No.2-Accused for the offences punishable under sections 409 and 420 of IPC, wherein the learned Metropolitan Magistrate by his order dated 8th July 1999 issued process against respondent no.2 3. Respondent no.2 also filed complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the present Applicant, wherein the Applicant was convicted. However, by srp -: 2 :- apl-1239 the separate order passed by me in Revision Application No. 352 of 2009, the parties were permitted to compound the said offence and the order convicting Applicants therein was quashed and set aside. It is stated that dispute between the parties having been amicably settled, the process issued against respondent no.2 may be quashed. The Applicant is present in Court. Upon query, she re-affirmed and re-iterated the prayers made by her in the application. She submitted she has very well understood the contents of application and that she has no objection if criminal proceeding initiated by her against respondent no.2 is quashed and set aside. Respondent no.2 is also present before me. 4. It is, thus, apparent that parties have settled their dispute amicably. A perusal of complaint would reveal that the allegations made therein are personal in nature and there is no element of public law involved in the crime. 5. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v/s. State of Punjab, [(2008) 4 SCC 582], I find that no purpose would be served by keeping the aforesaid criminal proceeding pending except burdening the Criminal -: 3 :- apl-1239 Courts, which are already overburdened. In that view of the matter, I find that in the interests of justice the aforesaid criminal proceeding is required to be quashed. However, at the same time, the costs need to be saddled on the parties for setting in motion the police machinery for setting their dispute. 7. Rule is therefore made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a), however, subject to the costs quantified at Rs.3,000/-. 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 three weeks from today and receipt thereof be placed on the record of the present matter. (RANJIT MORE, J.)