Bijoy Kumar Agarwal @ Bijay Kumar ... vs State Of W.B. & Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 2324 Cal

Form No. J(2)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction Appellate Side

Present:

The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta

CRR 726 of 2021

IA No: CRAN 1 of 2021

Bijoy Kumar Agarwal @ Bijay Kumar Agarwal & ors.

Vs.

State of W.B. & another

For the Petitioners : Mr. Kaustav Bagchi : Mr. Sourav Mukherjee : Mr. Debayan Ghosh

For the State : Mr. Madhusudan Sur, Ld. APP : Mr. Dipankar Paramanick

For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharya

Heard on: 25th March, 2021

Judgment on : 25th March, 2021

The Court:

This is an application for quashing of a proceeding in which a

charge sheet was submitted under Sections 418, 420 read with

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 63 and 69 of the

Copyrights Act.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits

as follows. The petitioners are the accused in this case. The

proceeding was initiated primarily on the grievance that certain

movies were telecast in violation of provision of the Copyrights Act,

among other things. In the course of the proceeding, a compromise

and settlement was arrived at between the accused and the defacto-

complainant/victim and a joint compromise application has been filed

in this regard. This is purely a dispute of private nature. In view of

such compromise, the impugned proceeding ought to be quashed on

the ground of compromise and settlement.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defacto-

complainant/opposite party submits as follows. 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.

Charges have not been framed yet in the present proceeding. In view

of such compromise and taking into consideration the fact that the

disputes are purely private in nature, the impugned proceeding ought

to be quashed.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State relies on the

case diary and submits as follows. The disputes between the accused

and the defacto-complainant/opposite party seem to be of a private

nature. If a compromise and settlement has been arrived at between

the private parties, the State would not come in the way of such

settlement.

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing

on behalf of the petitioners, the defacto-complainant/opposite party

and the State and have perused the revision petition, the joint

compromise application and the case diary.

It appears that a compromise and settlement has indeed been

arrived at between the defacto-complainant/victim and the accused in

this case and the disputes in question also are private in nature.

In view of the same and in the interest of justice, I quash the

impugned proceeding on the ground of compromise and settlement

arrived at between the private parties.

With these observations, 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.)