Ullas Kar Sahu @ Sri U.K. Sahu @ U.K. ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 1989 Jhar

                                               1

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                    Cr.M.P. No. 2671 of 2021
                  Ullas Kar Sahu @ Sri U.K. Sahu @ U.K. Sah, aged abuot 58 years, S/o
                  Krishna Chandra Sahu, R/o 43, Dingsai Para Road, Bally Municipality,
                  Bally Haora, P.O. & P.S. Bally, Dist. Howrah (W.B.) ... Petitioner

                                         -Versus-
             1.   The State of Jharkhand
             2.   Bijoy Kumar Naha, S/o Late Mukul Bhushan Naha, R/o Gulabi Bhawan,
                  Near K.K. School, Rangamati, P.O. Sindri, P.S. Baliapur, Dist. Dhanbad
                                                                  ... Opposite Parties
                                            -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh, Advocate For the Opposite Party-State : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, Spl.P.P. For Opposite Party No.2 : Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, Advocate

-----

05/13.05.2022. Heard Mr. Shailesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.D.

Agrawal, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, learned

counsel for opposite party no.2.

2. This 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 entire criminal proceeding

arising out of C.P. Case No.3075/2013 including the order taking cognizance

dated 20.08.2015, pending in the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate,

1st Class, Dhanbad.

4. Mr. Shailesh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case

is arising out of commercial transaction between the petitioner and opposite

party no.2 and it has been alleged by the complainant that the petitioner

did not clear commission amount and therefore the complaint case

has been filed. He further submits that now both the parties have

settled the dispute and for that I.A. No.3183 of 2022 has been filed for

joint compromise. He also submits that sum of Rs.2 Lakhs by way of

bank draft dated 07.04.2022 has been paid to opposite party no.2 as full

and final settlement of all financial transaction existing between the

petitioner and opposite party no.2 and in view of that this petition may be

allowed by this Court.

5. Mr. Vijay Kant Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 accepts

the submission of Mr. Shailesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and

submits that the reason for allowing the petition has been disclosed in the

said I.A. He further submits that the amount in question has been received

by opposite party no.2 as full and final settlement of all financial

transaction.

6. In view of the above facts and considering that both the parties

have settled the dispute and the amount in question has already been

paid to opposite party no.2 as full and final settlement and there is

no societal interest involved in this petition and also looking to the

judgments passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh

Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 and

in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. Versus State of Punjab & Anr. ,

reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, it is a fit case to exercise power

under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding

arising out of C.P. Case No.3075/2013 including the order taking

cognizance dated 20.08.2015, pending in the court of the learned

Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad is, hereby, quashed.

7. Resultantly, this petition stands allowed and disposed of.

8. Consequently, I.A. No.3183 of 2022 stands disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/