1 cr-apln-4757-10 jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRI. APPLN. NO. 4757 OF 2010 Dr. Amit V. Ranadive & Ors. ..Applicants Vs. State of Maharashtra ..Respondent .... Mr. Neville Majra i/b Yusuf and Associates for applicants Mr. S.A.Shaikh APP for State .... CORAM : SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, J. DATE : OCTOBER 26, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned advocate for the applicants and the learned APP for the State. Complainant and accused are present in Court. 2 The applicants are seeking quashing of CR Nos. 514 of 2010, 515 of 2010, 544 of 2010 and Notice Case No. 840/N/2010. CR No. 514 of 2010 has been lodged by applicant no.2 against the applicant no.1. It is under Sections 143, 144, 146, 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 427, 2 cr-apln-4757-10 341 of IPC. CR No. 515 of 2010 has been lodged by applicant no.1 against the applicant nos. 2 and 3. The said case is under Sections 341, 323, 506 r.w. 34 of IPC. CR No. 544 of 2010 has been lodged by applicant no.1 against the applicant nos. 3 and 4. The said case is under Sections 465, 467, 468, 469, 471, 420 r. w. 34 of IPC. The proceedings i.e. Notice Case No. 840/N/2010 under Section 145 of Cr.P.C. have been initiated by applicant no.3 against the applicant no.1 which is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai. 3 The learned advocate for the applicants states that all the disputes between the parties have been amicably settled by the parties and they have entered into Memorandum of Understanding (M.O.U.) which is annexed as Exhibit-B to this application. In the said M.O.U., the complainants have agreed to quashing of FIRs. lodged against the other applicants. 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 3 cr-apln-4757-10 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 overburdened 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. 4 cr-apln-4757-10 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, CR Nos. 514 of 2010, 515 of 2010 and 544 of 2010 of M.I.D.C. Police Station, are quashed. Proceedings in Notice Case No. 840/N/2010 pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 22nd Court, Andheri, Mumbai is also quashed. 8 Application disposed of. [ SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]