1 apl.827.11-828.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Application No. 827 of 2011 Ramchandra Kanu Mendadkar & ors. ....Applicants v/s. State of Maharashtra & anr. ....Respondents WITH Criminal Application No. 828 of 2011 Shailesh Tukaram Shelar & ors. ....Applicants vs. State of Maharashtra & anr. ....Respondents Mr. V.V. Purwant for the applicants. Mr. B.G. Tangsali for respondent no.2. Mr. S.S. Pednekar-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 8th August, 2011 PC: These two applications have been filed by the applicants seeking for quashing of criminal proceedings which are initiated by them against each other. 2. In Criminal Application No. 827/2011, the applicants are praying for quashing Regular Criminal Case No. 54/2010 pending before the Learned JMFC, Shrivardhan arising out of FIR No. 17/2010 lodged at the instance of respondent no.2-Complainant for the offence punishable under Section 143,147,148,354,451,427,323,504 and 506 of I.P.C.. In Criminal Application 2 apl.827.11-828.sxw No. 828/2011 the petitioners are praying for quashing of Criminal Case No. 53/2010 arising out of FIR No. 16/2010 registered at the instance of respondent no.2-Complainant. The petitioner no.1 in Writ Petition No. 827/2011 is the respondent no.2-Complainant in Writ Petition No. 828/2009 whereas petitioner no.1 in Writ Petition No. 828/2011 is the respondent no.2-Complainant in Writ Petition No. 827/2011. It appears that the petitioner no.1 in Criminal Application No. 828/2011 was having love with the niece of Ramchandra Mendadkar-applicant no.1 who is daughter of applicant no.8 Ganpat. It appears that according to Complainant Shailesh both of them married on 2nd September, 2010 and with respect to that there was some criminal litigation. It appears that due to this on 22nd September, 2010 i.e. after Ganpati Visarjan there was quarrel in these two groups which gave rise to filing of counter FIRs. 3. The matter is now amicably settled between the parties. The parties have decided to give an end to the criminal litigation. The parties are resident of the same village and are neighbors of each other. The parties have decided to live in harmony and peace in their village. 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 that view of the matter, I find that in the interests of justice the criminal proceedings are required to be quashed. 3 apl.827.11-828.sxw 5. Rule is, thus, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a) in both the petitions. (B.R. GAVAI, J)