Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sachidananda Panda vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 26 April, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
Present:
The Hon'ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay.
CRR 1234 of 2013
with
CRAN 2 of 2023
with
CRAN 3 of 2023
Sachidananda Panda
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
For the petitioner : Mr. Kaushik Biswas
For the State : Mr. N. P. Agarwal
Mr. Pratick Bose
For the Opposite Party No.2 : Mr. Tarique Quasimuddin
Ms. Sanchita Chaudhuri
Heard on : 08.02.2023
Judgement on : 26.04.2023
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.:
1.
The instant revisional application under Section 482 read with
Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been filed to
quash the proceedings being G.R. Case No. 144 of 2011 arising
out of Bowbazar P.S. Case No. 308, dated 16.06.2008 being
G.R. Case No. 2242 of 2008 under Section 403/406/419/420
of the Indian Penal Code pending before the Court of the
Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 3rd Court, Calcutta.
2. The Learned Advocate Mr. Kaushik Biswas appearing for the
Petitioners submit that a complaint was filed by the opposite
party no. 2 herein resulting in the registration of Bowbazar
Police Station Case No. 308/2008 dated 16.06.2008 being GR
Case No. 2242/2008 under Sections 403/406/419/420 of the
Indian Penal Code. At the end of the investigation the charge
sheet was submitted on 19.11.2009. The Learned Advocate for
the petitioners further state that the instant criminal revision
has been filed to set aside the order dated 20.12.2012 passed
by the Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 9th
First Track Court, City Sessions Court, Bichar Bhawan,
Kolkata rejecting the discharge petition. It was further
submitted during pendency of the instant application, a
compromise had been effectuated between the petitioner and
the opposite party no. 2 being the defacto complainant.
Consequently a terms of settlement dated 12.01.2023 has been
executed between the aforesaid parties. It was contended the
disputes being personal in nature devoid of involvement of
public policy to be affected the instant criminal revisional
application may be allowed and the proceeding pending before
the Trial Court be quashed.
3. The Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Opposite Party
No. 2 concedes to the submission of the Learned Advocate for
the petitioners stating that the opposite party no. 2 has
affirmed the contents of the aforesaid terms of settlement dated
12.01.2023 and also the affidavit dated 02.02.2023. The
Opposite Party No. 2 doesn't desire to pursue the case further
against the petitioners on the basis of the amicable settlement
of the disputes between the parties.
4. The Learned Advocate for the State submits that the dispute
having been settled between the parties the State has no
objection if the present petition is allowed on the event of
unwillingness of the parties to pursue the case any further.
5. Perusal of the materials on record including the complaint and
the terms of settlement, the dispute between the parties
appeared to be private in nature without the invocation of any
public policy in repugnance. Further in accordance to the
terms of settlement dated 01.02.2023 the property involved in
the instant matter was gifted to the Opposite Party No. 2 by the
wife of the petitioner to conclude the disputation.
6. Relying on the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another1, Parbatbhai
Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur and Others
Vs. State of Gujrat and Another2 and Madan Mohan Abbot
Vs. State of Punjab3, the criminal proceedings in the instant
case can be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the
parties where the disputes are personal in nature inclusive of
private disputants without public interest being affected.
(2012) 10 SCC 303
(2017) 9 SCC 641
(2008) CRI. L. J. 2243
7. Therefore, the instant criminal revisional application if allowed
to be continued will result in unnecessary consumption of
Court hours without yielding justified result.
8. In view of the compromise as aforesaid, G.R. Case No. 144 of
2011 arising out of Bowbazar p.s. Case No. 308, dated
16.06.2008 being G.R. Case No. 2242 of 2008 under Section
403/406/419/420 of the Indian Penal Code pending before the
Court of the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 3rd Court,
Calcutta is quashed.
9. Both the parties shall approbate the aforesaid terms of
settlement dated 12.01.2023 and 01.02.2023 and shall remain
bound by the same.
10. This criminal revision application being CRR 1234 of 2013
is allowed along with CRAN 2 of 2023 and CRAN 3 of 2023 are
disposed of.
11. There is no order as to cost.
12. Let the copy of this judgment be sent to the learned trial court
as well as the police station concerned for necessary
information and compliance.
13. All parties shall act on the server copy of this judgment duly
downloaded from the official website of this court.
(ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.)
