Kaustav Biswas & Anr vs The State Of West Bengal
2021 Latest Caselaw 5892 Cal

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

Present:

The Hon'ble Justice Jay Sengupta

C.R.R. 1934 of 2021

With

CRAN 1 of 2021

Kaustav Biswas & Anr.

Versus

The State of West Bengal

For the petitioners : Mr. Pawan Kr. Gupta Mr. Somesh Kumar Ghosh Ms. Sofia Nesar ..... Advocates

For the State : Mr. Madhusudan Sur Mr. Dipankar Paramanick ..... Advocates

For the Opposite Party No. 2. : Mr. Kaushik Chowdhury ..... Advocate

Heard on : 30.11.2021 Judgment on : 30.11.2021

Jay Sengupta, J.:

This is an application praying for quashing of the impugned

proceeding under Sections 406, 498A read with Section 34 of the

Indian Penal Code on the ground of compromise and settlement

arrived at between the private parties.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits

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

no.1 is the husband and the petitioner no.2 is the mother in law of the

defacto-complainant/opposite party no.2. In the course of the

proceeding, a settlement and compromise was arrived at between the

private parties of all disputes that had led to the registration of the

First Information Report. In fact, a joint compromise application has

been filed in this regard. In view of the same, 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 no.2 submits as follows. The husband

and wife have agreed to file for mutual divorce. The disputes between

the parties that had led to the initiation of the impugned proceeding

have indeed been settled and compromised between the victim and the

accused.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State files a copy of

report prepared by the LASI, Burdwan Women Police Station and a

letter of the defacto-complainant as well as the statement of the

defaco-complainant recorded by the Investigating Officer. The same

are taken on record. He relies on the case diary and submits as

follows. Although the case was started under other penal provisions as

well, the charge-sheet was submitted only under Sections 406, 498A

read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, during

pendency of the proceeding, a compromise and settlement was arrived

at between the private parties. The case diary does not contain any

injury report. Learned counsel for the State submits that the State

would not come in the way, if a compromise is arrived at between the

private parties.

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing

on behalf of the petitioners, the defacto-complainant/victim and the

State and have perused the revision, the case diary, the report and

documents filed on behalf of the State.

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.

This is a fit case to be quashed on the ground of compromise in

terms of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in 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

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 judgment may be

delivered to the learned Advocates for the parties, if applied for, upon

compliance of all formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J)

ssi