1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4783 OF 2009 Mayur Kishore Suru @ Soni : Applicant V/s. Abdul Razzak Din Mohammed & Anr. : Respondents .... Mr.R.S.Saluja for the applicant. Mr.Raisinghani for respondent no.1. Ms S.V.Gajare, Addl. Public Prosecutor for respondent no.2. ... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 16, 2010. P.C.: Leave to amend. Amendment be carried out during the course of the day. 2. This application is taken up for hearing on admission. 3. Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned counsel for the respective respondents waive service. By consent, heard finally. 4. The petitioner has filed the present petition for quashing and setting aside Criminal Case No.143/PW/2005 pending before the learned 2 Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s 47th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, and FIR being MCR No.10/2002. 5. The complaint was filed with an allegation that the complainant had given gold ornaments to the applicant-accused for repairs and polishing. However, the complainant though had demanded the said ornaments, the applicant-accused was refusing to hand over the same. On the basis of these allegations, the complaint came to be filed for offence punishable under section 409 of the I.P.C. After the complaint was lodged, the learned Magistrate had ordered investigation under section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. Accordingly, L.T.Marg police station registered F.I.R. No.10/2002 and charge-sheet came to be filed before the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. 6. In response to the notice issued by this Court, an affidavit has been filed by the respondent no.1. It has been stated in the affidavit-in- reply that due to mediation and conciliation of elderly member of the society, the dispute and differences between the complainant and the accused have been amicably settled and that the complainant has no grievance against the applicant. The respondent-complainant has joined the petitioner in the affidavit praying for quashing and setting aside the criminal prosecution. 3 7. The complainant as well as the applicant are personally present in Court and they have been identified by their respective counsel. The complainant and the applicant reiterate that the matter has been amicably settled between them. It is submitted that since both the complainant and the accused are in the same business, the matter has been mutually settled. It is further submitted that in order to avoid bitterness, in the interest of justice, the criminal proceedings be quashed and set aside. 8. It appears that there was some misunderstanding between the parties on account of which the prosecution came to be lodged at the best of the complainant. Since the complainant does not have any grievance and since he himself also prays for quashing the proceedings, I find that it would not be in the interest of justice to keep the criminal proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate. I find that this is a fit case for exercising the powers under section 483 of the Cr.P.C. and bring an end to the litigation, the pendency of which will not give any fruitful result. 9. In that view of the matter, rule is made absolute in terms of amended prayer clause (A). B. R. GAVAI, J.