Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 291 (CAL)

Raj Kishan Shaw v. State Of West Bengal

2020-02-27

JAY SENGUPTA

body2020
JUDGMENT Jay Sengupta, J. - These are applications seeking quashing of two connected criminal proceedings, one under Sections 323 and 498A of the Penal Code and the other under Sections 323, 341, 506 and 34 of the Penal Code. 2. A report dated 27.02.2020 filed by the Inspector-in-Charge of Howrah Police Station is taken on record. 3. It appears that there was a miscommunication between the police authorities and the private parties in this case. As per the police report and as admitted by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the private parties, the private parties actually went to Howrah Women Police Station to file their letter of compromise and they did not go to the Howrah Police Station for such purpose. However, subsequently a letter of compromise was given to Howrah Police Station and in the latest police report, the Inspector-in-Charge of Howrah Police Station has stated that he contacted with the defacto complainant over mobile phone when the defacto complainant stated that she would not like to proceed with the criminal case lodged at the Howrah Police Station. 4. Personal appearance of the Inspector-in-Charge of the Howrah Police Station namely, Mr. Arjun Shome and the Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Howrah Police Station namely, Mr. Sanjoy Kumar Sardar, is dispensed with. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in the two revisional applications submits as follows. During the pendency of the impugned proceeding, a settlement and compromise has been arrived at between the defacto complainant/victim and the accused regarding all disputes that had led to the initiation of the impugned proceedings. Accordingly, two applications praying for quashing of the two impugned proceedings on the ground of compromise have also been filed in connection with the original revisional applications. 6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the victim/defacto complainant submits as follows. A settlement and compromise has indeed been arrived between the private parties regarding all disputes that had led to the filing of the present cases as would be evident from paragraph nos. 7 and 8 of the two miscellaneous applications. In view of the same, the two impugned proceedings ought to be quashed on the ground of compromise. 7. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State in both the revisional applications submit that the State would not come in the way if any settlement is arrived at between the private parties. 8. In view of the same, the two impugned proceedings ought to be quashed on the ground of compromise. 7. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the State in both the revisional applications submit that the State would not come in the way if any settlement is arrived at between the private parties. 8. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels representing the parties and have perused the revision petitions, connected applications and the case diaries. 9. It appears that a compromise and settlement has indeed been arrived at between the private parties and as such, they are praying for quashing of the two impugned proceedings on the ground of compromise. 10. The disputes appear to be substantially of private nature. 11. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I quash the both the impugned proceedings, being Howrah Women Police Station Case No. 19 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No. 1953 of 2017 pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court at Howrah and Howrah Police Station Case No. 209 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No. 1982 of 2017 pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Howrah, on the ground of compromise and settlement arrived at between the private parties. 12. With these observations, the two revision petitions and the connected applications are disposed of. 13. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.