973-CA-3363-2024.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 973 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3363 OF 2024 Shriniwas @ Pappu Maruti Shinde And Others Versus The State Of Maharashtra And Another Mr. P. M. Salunke, Advocate for Applicants Mr. A. R. Kale, APP for Respondent No. 1 Mr. P. S. Kokane h/f Mr. A. L. Kanade, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 CORAM :R.M. JOSHI, J DATE :OCTOBER 09, 2026 P. C. : 1. Learned Counsels for both sides, on instruction, make statement that the parties have settled the dispute and in view of the same, Informant has no objection for allowing the application. 2. Learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2/Informant submits that he has filed affidavit of the informant recording no objection. He also apprised the Court by stating that even before the Sessions Court for grant of pre-arrest bail, no objection was recorded by the Informant. 3. Learned APP opposed the application by referring to the nature of allegations against the Applicants. 4. Parties have settled the dispute and needless to say that if the proceedings are not quashed and trial is conducted the result would be obvious. Having regard to the nature of offence and as such, settlement 2026:BHC-AUG:48234-DB 973-CA-3363-2024.odt appears to be genuine, this Court finds no impediment in allowing the application in view of the no objection recorded by the Informant. 5. In view of this, Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses ‘b’, ‘c’, ‘h’, ‘i’ and ‘k’. 6. Since the no objection is recorded by the Informant, in case he has received any compensation, he is directed to refund the same to the State. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Malani