Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sarvan Zindal @ Sarvan Kumar ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 3817 Jhar

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3817 Jhar
Judgement Date : 6 October, 2021

Jharkhand High Court
Sarvan Zindal @ Sarvan Kumar ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 October, 2021
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             Cr.M.P. No. 1875 of 2021
                  Sarvan Zindal @ Sarvan Kumar Zindal, aged about 40 years, son of
                  Shyam Sundar Zindal, Resident of North Side, New Road, Phusro, Near
                  Shyam Bhandar, P.O. Phusro Bazar, P.S. Bermo, District- Bokaro
                                                                  ... Petitioner

                                          -Versus-
             1.   The State of Jharkhand
             2.   Chandan Kumar Agarwal, son of Motilal Agarwal, resident of B.M.
                  Agarwal Colony, Dhansar, P.O. & P.S. Dhansar, District- Dhanbad
                                                                  ... Opposite Parties
                                            -----
             CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
                                            -----
             For the Petitioner             : Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate

For the Opposite Party-State : Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, Spl.P.P. For Opposite Party No.2 : Mr. Mayank Mohit Sinha, Advocate

-----

03/06.10.2021. Heard Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, learned counsel for the petitioner,

Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, learned Spl. P.P. for the opposite party-State and

Mr. Mayank Mohit Sinha, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been taken through Video

Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account

the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have

complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent

this matter has been heard.

3. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal

proceedings including the First Information Report in connection with

Barwadda P.S. Case No.14 of 2021 for the offences registered under

Sections 419, 420, 504, 506, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a supplementary

affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner, wherein, settlement of

the dispute arrived between the petitioner and opposite party no.2 has been

annexed. He further submits that the allegation is civil in nature. There were

some transactions between the petitioner and opposite party no.2, which

has been returned by the petitioner to opposite party no.2 and that is why

the settlement dated 24.09.2021 has been arrived between the parties.

5. Learned counsel Mr. Mayank Mohit Sinha waives notice on behalf of

opposite party no.2 and submits that he has already filed Vakalatnama on

behalf of opposite party no.2. He also accepts that the settlement of dispute

has been arrived between the parties and opposite party no.2 has received

the amount after the settlement.

6. Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agrawal, learned Spl.P.P. for the State submits that

this is a case of money transaction between the parties. There is no societal

interest involved and this Court may pass any appropriate order.

7. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner,

wherein, memorandum of understanding along with bank statement have

been annexed. It has been stated in paragraph 3 of the settlement dated

24.09.2021 that party A and party B would endeavor to get their respective

F.I.Rs. being Bermo P.S. Case No.121/2021 and Barwadda P.S. Case

No.14/2021 be quashed before the competent court. It has been stated in

paragraph 6 of the said settlement that Chandan Kumar Agarwal, who is the

informant, has received Rs.27,33,650/- from the petitioner. In paragraph 7

of the said settlement, further description of payment and mode of payment

are described. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Narinder Singh

v. State of Punjab, reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 has held that even in

non-compoundable cases, the High Court can exercise its power to quash

the petition. Similar view has been taken in the case of Gian Singh v.

State of Punjab, reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303.

8. In view of the above facts and considering the judgments of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court, no purpose will be served if the said proceeding is

allowed to be continued particularly when there is no societal interest

involved in the case in hand. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings

including the First Information Report in connection with Barwadda P.S.

Case No.14 of 2021, pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate,

1st Class, Dhanbad is quashed.

9. This criminal miscellaneous petition is, therefore, allowed and

disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter