Bala Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 1601 Jhar

                                         1

  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
               Cr. Revision No. 308 of 2004
                          With
               I.A. No. 3200 of 2022
                                 ---------

      Bala Devi                                   ..... Petitioner
                               Versus
      1.   The State of Jharkhand.
      2.   Ram Prasad Mahto.
      3.   Doman Mahto @ Dev Nandan Mahto.
      4.   Ram Kunwar Mahto.          ..... Opposite Parties
                                 ---------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. P.K.Mukhopadhyay, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.Chatterjee, Spl.PP For the O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 : Mr. P.C.Jha, Advocate 09/Dated: 21st April, 2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. This revision application is directed against the judgment

dated 24.01.2004 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge,

Fast Track Court No-III, Bokaro, in Sessions Trial No. 242 of

1985; whereby the accused persons have been acquitted from

the charges framed in Sessions Trial No. 242 of 1985.

3. Mr. P.K.Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner draws attention of this court towards the

interlocutory application which has been filed in the form of

joint compromise petition between the parties. He further

submits that both parties have arrived in an amicable

settlement, as such the case may be dropped against the

petitioner by quashing the impugned judgment.

4. Mr. P.C. Jha, learned counsel appearing for O.P. Nos. 2

to 4 fairly admits about the factum of compromise. He further

submits that even the opposite parties do not want to continue

the litigation.

5. In view of the aforesaid compromise entered into by and

between the parties the factum of which has been incorporated

in the interlocutory application is, hereby, accepted by this

Court since this is a private dispute and does not involve public

at large.

6. Consequently, I.A. No. 3200 of 2022 is, hereby, allowed.

7. Mr. Prabir Chatterjee, learned counsel for the State

submits that in view of the interlocutory application the case

may be disposed of.

8. Having regard to the facts of the case and submission of

learned counsel for the parties and the interlocutory application

which has been filed in the form of joint compromise petition, it

appears that the parties have compromised and since the matter

is between the parties only and does not involve public at large,

as such the instant revision application, is, hereby disposed of.

9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the courts

below and also to the petitioner as well as opposite parties

through the officer-in-charge of concerned police station.

10. Let the lower court record be sent to the court concerned

forthwith.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

Amardeep/