JUDGMENT 1. - This is criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the entire proceedings in Criminal Regular Case No.112/2010 arising out of FIR No.283/2008, Police Station Surajpol, District Udaipur for the offence under Section 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. 2. The present misc. petition has been filed for quashing of the FIR on the basis of compromise. The allegations in short are that the petitioners and the complainant had jointly purchased the plot. After purchasing the plot, a partition took place. After the partition, the complainant came to know that the portion which came in the share of the complainant and his wife in the partition, the petitioner Dinesh Kumar has started construction on the said portion and that after forging the signatures, the petitioners have filed an application for mutation of entire plot in their favour and also applied for construction permission etc. A civil suit was also filed by the complainant. 3. During the pendency of the proceedings, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties with the intervention of the respective people of the society. Copy of the said compromise dated 8.8.2009 has been placed on record. 4. Learned counsel for the complainant verifies the said compromise and states that he has instruction to state before this Court that the matter has been compromised and the respondent-complainant has no objection if the FIR is quashed. It is also admitted by the learned counsel for the complainant that in pursuance to the said compromise, even the civil suit No.122/2008 titled as 'Rishabh Kumar v. Tara Bai & Ors.' has been dismissed vide order dated 11.1.2010 by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Udaipur City - South, Udaipur. 5. In view of the fact that civil suit has already been withdrawn on the basis of compromise and the statement of the learned counsel for the complainant verifying the said compromise placed on record as also the statement of the learned counsel for the complainant that they have no objection if the FIR is quashed, this Court is satisfied that the matter has been compromised. Moreover, the dispute herein, is personal in nature. 6. The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008) 4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No.6 as follows:- "6. Moreover, the dispute herein, is personal in nature. 6. The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008) 4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No.6 as follows:- "6. We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the Court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law." Accordingly, the present criminal misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No.283/2008 as well as all other proceedings in pursuance to the said FIR are quashed.Petition allowed. *******