Judgment M.R. Shah, J.—Rule. Mr. L.B. Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. Chintan Popat, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of Respondent No. 3. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with the consent of the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and as it is reported that the matter is settled between the complainant and the applicants - original accused, the present application is taken up for final hearing today. 3. An FIR has been lodged against the applicants and other co-accused with Bhavnagar “A” Division Police Station, Bhavnagar for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. 4. It is reported that the matter has been settled between the parties qua original complainant and the applicants only and an affidavit to that effect has also been filed by Respondent No. 3 – original complainant, which is affirmed by him by submitting that he has no objection, if the impugned FIR qua the applicants is quashed and set aside as the parties have amicably settled the entire dispute. 5. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties have relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab reported in 2008 (4) SCC 582 and have requested to allow the present application and set aside the impugned complaint/FIR qua the applicants. 6. The present application came up for hearing before learned Single Judge on 21/03/2011 and it was reported that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and that the complainant has no grievance against the present applicants, learned Single Judge (Coram: M.D. Shah, J.) passed following order on 21/03/2011 : “1. Learned Advocate, Mr. Chintan Popat, has stated at the bar that he has instructions to appear on behalf of the Respondent No. 3. He has placed on record the affidavit affirmed by the complainant. He also identified the complainant who is present in Court. It is submitted by him that the matter is settled between the parties and complainant has no grievance against the present petitioner. 2. It is submitted by learned APP, Mr. He has placed on record the affidavit affirmed by the complainant. He also identified the complainant who is present in Court. It is submitted by him that the matter is settled between the parties and complainant has no grievance against the present petitioner. 2. It is submitted by learned APP, Mr. L.R. Pujari on instructions from the concerned Police Officer present in Court that against the present petitioner, other offences were also registered with Bhavnagar ‘A’ Division Police Station. It is also submitted that incident took place on 12-2-2011 and within no time, matter is settled with the complainant. 3. In view of the above, P.I., Bhavnagar ‘A’ Division Police Station, is directed to verify as to whether the complainant has settled the matter with the accused voluntarily or not by the next date. S.O. to 29-3-2011.” 7. Today when the present application is taken up for hearing, it is reported that Respondent No. 3 – original complainant is personally present in the Court, who has been identified by learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties and has stated that he has entered into the settlement without any pressure and the matter has been settled between the parties amicably voluntarily. In view of the above, it appears to the Court that to continue criminal proceedings against the applicants would be unnecessary harassment to the applicants and it will not be in the interest of the parties. 8. Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties have jointly submitted that it may also be observed that the present settlement is between the original complainant and the applicants only and the impugned complaint/FIR be quashed and set aside qua the applicants only. 9. In view of the above and looking to the settlement entered into between the applicants and the complainant and looking to the nature of offence as alleged and considering the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot (Supra), the present application is allowed and the impugned FIR/Complaint being C.R. No. I-31/2011 registered with Bhavnagar “A” Division Police Station, Bhavnagar is hereby quashed and set aside qua the applicants herein – original accused Nos.1 and 6 only. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. P P P P P