1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4322 OF 2009 Smt.Nayana Suraj Parmar & Ors. : Applicants (Orig.Accused) V/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents (Resp.No.2-Orig.Complainant) ... Mr.A.P. Mundargi with Ms Gauri Godse for the applicants. Mrs.P.P.Bhosale, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Mr.P.S. Gokhale for respondent no.2. .... WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4399 OF 2009 Mr.Suresh Phutermal Jain & Anr. : Applicants V/s. State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents .... Mr.V.S. Kotwal i/b. Mr.A.M. Saraogi for the applicants. Mrs.P.P. Bhosale, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. Mr.P.S.Gokhale for respondent no.2. .... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : OCTOBER 01, 2009. 2 P.C.: 1. The applicants have moved this Court for quashing and setting aside criminal proceedings registered vide C.R. No.I-199/2009 dated 12.9.2009 by Kasarvadavli police station, Thane. 2. The prosecution has been registered against the applicants under sections 406, 420 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The complaint was lodged by the complainant in respect of some incident against the applicants in both these applications and some others. Since the filing of the complaint and after the matters were moved before this Court, it appears that the complainant and the applicants have settled the dispute between them and the complainant has filed an affidavit in Court to the effect that he has received the entire amount of his share and share of the co-owners towards the sale consideration of the family property as stated in the sale deed dated 27.4.2006. He has also referred to the reasons why he filed the complaint under an erroneous belief given to him by members of his family. Along with the affidavit, the complainant has filed the affidavits of his family members to the same effect. The complainant has specifically stated vide paragraph 5 that he has no objection if the present 3 Criminal Applications are allowed and F.I.R. No.I-199/2009 dated 12.9.2009 is quashed and set aside. The complainant has also appeared in Court and stated that he supports the affidavit and the settlement has been arrived at between the parties amicably and without any coercion or pressure. He has also stated that he has entered into the settlement on his own free will and volition and he does not wish to pursue the prosecution. Having regard to the fact that the dispute between the parties is in the nature of a private dispute where the rights of the parties alone are involved and the public at large are not concerned with, I consider it appropriate in the interest of justice to accept the plea of the parties and quash the F.I.R., having regard to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] and Manoj Sharma v. State & Ors. (MANU/SC/8122/2008) = (2008 (4) KLT 417 (SC). In the circumstances, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has no objection. 3. Accordingly, the Criminal Applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). S.A. BOBDE, J.