Ram Gopal Tripathi @ Ram Gopal ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 5120 Jhar

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              Cr.M.P. No. 4283 of 2022
                  Ram Gopal Tripathi @ Ram Gopal Tripathy, aged about 41 years, son
                  of Krishna Murari Tripathy, resident of Ram Vihar Colony, Near
                  Manavata Inter College, Para Road, Rajajipuram, P.O. & P.S.
                  Rajajipuram, District- Lucknow, State- Uttar Pradesh
                                                                    ... Petitioner
                                          -Versus-
             1.   The State of Jharkhand
             2.   Sanjiv Kumar Dey, son of Ajit Kumar Dey, resident of Station Road,
                  N.S. Colony, Jadugora Mines, P.O. & P.S. Jadugora, Town- Jamshedpur,
                  District- East Singhbhum                         ... Opposite Parties
                                            -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Nishant Kumar Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party-State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, S.P.P. For Opposite Party No.2 : Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate

-----

02/16.12.2022. This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal

proceedings arising out of Jadugora P.S. Case No.08 of 2020 instituted

under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code,

pending in the court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Ghatsila.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation is made

in the FIR for payment of total Rs.34,280/-. He further submits that now

good sense has prevailed between the parties and the amount has been

paid by the petitioner to opposite party no.2 and for that joint compromise

petition has been filed in terms of I.A. No. 11177 of 2022. On these

grounds, he submits that entire criminal proceeding may kindly be quashed.

3. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also accepts the submission

of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that opposite party

no.2 has received the amount. He further submits that the compromise has

taken place between the parties and for that the said I.A. has been filed,

which has been supported by separate affidavits of the petitioner as well as

opposite party no.2. He also submits that opposite party no.2 does not want

to proceed with the case.

4. In view of the above facts and submissions of the learned counsel for

the parties and considering that the matter has been compromised between

the parties and opposite party no.2 has already received the amount in

question and there is no societal interest involved in the case and also

considering the judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian

Singh v. State of Punjab & another; [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and in

Narinder Singh & others v. State of Punjab & another; [(2014) 6

SCC 466, the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Jadugora P.S. Case

No.08 of 2020, pending in the court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Ghatsila is, hereby, quashed.

5. Accordingly, this petition stands allowed and disposed of.

6. Consequently, I.A. No.11177 of 2022 stands disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/