ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 16.03.2021 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in MCRC No. 52294 of 2020 rejecting the request of the parties to quash the FIR in Crime No. 552 of 2017, Police Station, Indarganj, District, Gwalior for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 120-B, Indian Penal Code.

3. The main parties to the dispute are close relatives in the manner that the appellant No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 are brothers whereas appellant No. 2 is the son of appellant No. 1. The dispute essentially related to a property left by the grandfather of the appellant No. 1 and the respondent No.2 (complainant) and had arisen in view of the two alleged instruments of bequeath. The dispute led to filing of Civil Suit No. 256-A of 2017 in the Court of th Civil Judge No. 2, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh by the appellants and of criminal case in the FIR aforesaid by the respondent No.2.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the appellants and the respondent No. 2 in unison that with the intervention of the elders of family, they have finally resolved all their disputes. It is also pointed out that acting on the settlement, appellants have, in fact, withdrawn the said civil suit on 09.05.2019; and the parties have sold the property in question to a third party and consideration has been shared amongst the beneficiaries concerned.

5. The issues and differences having been resolved, the appellants moved the High Court in MCRC No. 43049 of 2018 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of criminal case in the said FIR No. 552 of 2017 and also moved I.A. No. 8246 of 2018. Thereupon, the Court directed the parties to appear before the Principal Registrar of the Court for verification of the compromise. However, the parties failed to appear on the appointed dates and the Court, in its order dated 06.03.2019, observed that the application was filed without there being any compromise between the parties. However, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn.

6. Thereafter, the appellants again moved the High Court in MCRC No. 52294 of 2020 with reference to the compromise; and it was submitted that since the earlier petition was dismissed as withdrawn, the fresh one would be maintainable. However, in the impugned order dated 16.03.2021, the High Court opined otherwise. The High Court observed that the earlier petition, MCRC No. 43049 of 2018, was withdrawn without liberty to file afresh and for this reason, declined to entertain the petition filed by the appellants in MCRC No. 52294 of 2020.

7. It is submitted that the parties having resolved all their disputes and having acted on the compromise; the civil suit having been withdrawn; and the property in question having been sold to a third party, no purpose would be served by continuing with the criminal proceedings. On the contrary, interest of justice shall be served if the proceedings in question are quashed so that the parties may move on while leaving the past dispute in the family behind them. The submissions aforesaid are made ad idem on behalf of the appellants and respondent No. 2 (complainant). Learned counsel appearing for the State, however, has opposed the prayer for quashing of the proceedings in the FIR in question, essentially with the submissions that the allegations in the present case are for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code; and the crime alleged being against the society at large, the present matter does not call for any lenient view of the Court.

8. Having examined the matter in its totality, we are clearly of the view that the FIR in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a civil nature dispute in the family; and there are no such over-bearing circumstances for which the appellants ought to be prosecuted even after the family has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there