1 Cri.Appln.63/2011 in Cri.Appln.2534/2010 1. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.63/2011. (Pandurang s/o Ananda Dhole and Anr. Vs. The State of Mah. And Anr.) in CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2534/2010. (Pandurang s/o Ananda Dhole and Anr. Vs. The State of Mah. And Anr.) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of Coram,appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Smt.SS Jadhav, Adv. for applicants; Mr.KM Suraywanshi, APP for State. Mr.SV Adwant, Adv. For Resp.No.2/Complainant. *** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL ,J. DATE : 22 nd February, 2011. ... 1) Heard. 2) By Criminal Application No.63/2011, joint request is made by the applicants as well as Respondent No.2, seeking to compromise the dispute and also urging to quash the F.I.R. on the basis of which Crime No.33/2010 was registered at Newasa Police Station, District Ahmednagar for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506, and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 3) The applicants Pandurang, Amol and complainant -Smt. – Sangita are present, identified by respective counsel. 4) By Criminal Application No.2534/2010, F.I.R.No.33/2010 for the above referred offences is sought to be quashed and set aside by the applicants/accused Pandurang and Amol. – 5) Since the parties reside in the same village and have patched up their controversies and desire to have good relations, the original complainant accepts, the accusations against the accused Pandurang and his son Amol were made out of 2 Cri.Appln.63/2011 in Cri.Appln.2534/2010 frustration and no event of any hurling in the caste of the complainant has indeed taken place. The complainant also accepts that on 22.5.2010, Amol was at Aurangabad. 6) Taking these aspect into consideration, the F.I.R., vide Crime No. 33/2010, registered against the accused/applicants Pandurang – and Amol, referred above, is quashed and set aside. 7) Smt. Jadhav, on instructions, informs, the accused/applicants Pandurang and Amol would not further take up the matter including prosecuting the complainant in and by way of malicious prosecution. 8) Both the applications disposed of as above. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/