JUDGMENT : M.S. Sonak, J 1. Heard Ms. G. Kamat, who appears under Legal Aid Scheme on behalf of the petitioner in WPCR No.68 of 2020 and Mr. Salkar, learned counsel who appears on behalf of the petitioners in WPCR No.25 of 2022. 2. By instituting both these petitions, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.27/2018 dated 05.05.2018 lodged by the petitioner in WPCR No.68 of 2020 and FIR No.26/18 dated 05.05.2018 lodged by the petitioners in WPCR No.25 of 2022. 3. The matters had been referred to the mediation because the allegations in both the FIRs to a great extent were personal to the petitioners in both these petitions. Today, the learned counsel for the petitioners, based on instructions, report that they will have no objection if both the FIRs are quashed. 4. Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the respective respondents waive notice on rule. 6. Having regard to the observations in paragraph 61 of the Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 , and after hearing the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, we think that the interests of justice will be met if both the FIRs are quashed by exercising our inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 7. Accordingly, with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioners and the parties whom they represent and upon assessing the allegations in the FIRs and the law laid down in GianSingh(supra), we allow both these petitions and quash the FIR No.27/2018 dated 05.05.2018 lodged by the petitioner in WPCR No.68 of 2020 and FIR No.26/18 dated 05.05.2018 lodged by the petitioners in WPCR No.25 of 2022. 8. The rule is made absolute in both these petitions in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order for costs.