Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Arnab Jyoti Sarkar And Another vs State Of W.B. & Another on 20 January, 2021
Form No. J(2)
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
Appellate Side
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta
CRR 31 of 2021
With
IA No: CRAN 1 of 2021
Arnab Jyoti Sarkar and another
Vs.
State of W.B. & another
For the Petitioners : Mr. Niladri Sekhar Ghosh
: Mr. Srimoyee Mukherjee
For the State : Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherji, Ld.PP
: Ms. Sreeparna Das
For the o.p.no.2 : Mr. Mujibar Ali Naskar
Heard on: 20th January, 2021
Judgment on : 20th January, 2021
The Court:
This is an application seeking quashing of an
investigational proceeding under Sections 498A and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners
submits as follows. The petitioners are the husband and the
father-in-law of the defacto-complainant/victim in this case.
During pendency of the proceeding, a compromise and
settlement has been arrived at between the private parties of
all disputes that had led to the registration of the First
Information Report. In fact, the husband and the wife are
staying together. In the interest of justice, the impugned
proceeding ought to be quashed on the ground of compromise
and settlement.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
victim/opposite party no.2 submits as follows. A compromise
and settlement has indeed been arrived at between the accused
and the defacto-complainant/victim of all disputes that had led
to the initiation of the present case. A joint compromise
application has also been filed in this regard praying for
quashing of the proceeding on the ground of settlement.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on
the case diary and, in his usual fairness, submits that the
State would not come in the way if a settlement and
compromise is arrived at between the private parties.
I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels
appearing on behalf of the petitioners, the opposite party no.2
and the State and have perused the revision petition and the
case diary.
It appears that a compromise and settlement has indeed
been arrived at between the private parties of all disputes that
had led to the initiation of the impugned proceeding.
The husband and wife are admittedly staying together.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I
find that this is a fit case for quashing on the ground of
compromise and settlement in view of the ratio laid down by
the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Gian Singh vs. State of
Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303.
In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I quash
the impugned proceeding on the ground of compromise and
settlement between the accused and the victim/defacto-
complainant.
The revisional application and the connected application
are disposed of.
Urgent photostat certified copies of this order may be
delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for,
upon compliance of all formalities.
(Jay Sengupta,J.)
ssi
