1 apl.531.11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Criminal Application No. 531 of 2011 Mr. Prashant Subhash Ingale ...Applicant v/s. Mr. Malcom Phiroz Ilavia & anr. ...Respondents Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal for the applicant. Mr. P.B. Gujar for respondent no.1. Mr.Y.M. Nakhwa-APP for the State. CORAM: B.R. GAVAI, J. 23rd June, 2011 PC: Leave to amend. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner is praying for quashing FIR vide Crime No. 30/2011 registered with Marine Drive police station for the offences punishable under section 279, 338 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The offence is registered at the first information of the respondent no. 1 stating therein that when he was riding the motorcycle, he was dashed with one Indica Car. On enquiry it has been found that said Indica Car belong to the petitioner. 4. The matter has now been settled between the parties. The affidavit has been filed by the respondent-Complainant stating that matter has been amicably 2 apl.531.11.sxw settled and that the Complainant does not wish to prosecute the complaint. Both the Complainant so also the applicant are personally present in the Court reiterating that the matter is settled between the parties. 5. 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/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. 7. Rule is, thus, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). (B.R. GAVAI, J)