MP 1 APL326_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 326 OF 2011 Ganesh Madan Gaikwad and others ... Applicants Versus State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 327 OF 2011 Shahid Bashir Khan and others ... Applicants Versus State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents Mrs. Pranali Kakade, Advocate for the Applicants in APL 326 of 2011 and for Respondents in APL 327 of 2011. Mr. Balwant V. Patole, Advocate for the Applicants in APL 327 of 2011 and for Respondents in APL 326 of 2011. Mr. A. S. Shitole, APP for the State. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI, J. TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 2011 P. C. : Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. Both these applications seek quashing of two cross F.I.R.s arose out of the same incident. In Criminal Application No. 326 of 2011, the applicants are seeking quashing of Crime No. 111 of 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short). The said F.I.R. is registered at the behest of the respondent No. 2 who is an MP 2 APL326_11 accused in Crime No. 110 of 2011. The applicants in Criminal Application No. 327 of 2011 pray for quashing of Crime No. 110 of 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The said F.I.R. is registered at the behest of the respondent No. 2 who is an accused in Crime No. 111 of 2011. 3. It appears that on 28th March 2011, there was a cricket match between two teams. The complainants, in both the cases, were playing in the rival teams. There was a dispute between the two teams on account of the alleged No Ball given by an umpire, and that thereafter, the incident took place. There was a fight between two teams and various players in both the teams sustained injuries. 4. No doubt that in one of the cases, applicants are charged with serious offences punishable under Section 307, and in another case, the rival group is charged with the offences punishable under Section 326 of the IPC. However, it can be seen that the incident took place at the spur of the moment on account of the alleged No Ball. It can further be seen that neither would there be any pre-mediation. It can further be seen that the weapons alleged to be used are stumps, bats, etc. which were handy at the time of playing the match. Both the parties are residing in the same locality. The parties have decided to settle their dispute and live peacefully. 5. It can, thus, be seen that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. 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. MP 3 APL326_11 6. In view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2008) 4 SCC page 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) in both the applications. (B. R. GAVAI, J)