SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Arun Soman & Ors. Vs. State Of Wb & … vs Unknown on 26 June, 2018

1

118
26.06.2018

sm
c.no.42

CRR 922 of 2018
with
CRAN 1342 of 2018

In the matter of: Arun Soman Ors. Vs. State of WB Anr.

Mr.Sanjay Banerjee,
Ms.Sutapa Dutta .. for the petitioners.

Mr.Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Ld.PP
Mr.Ayan Basu. .. for the State.

Mr.Debapratim Guha. .. for the opposite party no.2,

This is an application for quashing of the proceeding in CGR Case No. 1921 of

2009, pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24-Parganas.

Although an FIR was lodged under Sections 498A/420/ 411/312/313/506(II) read with

Section 120B and Section 406 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code, the charge-sheet

was filed in this case under Sections 498A/406 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code.

The learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the accused/petitioners as also on

behalf of the defacto complainant/victim lady/opposite party no.2 submit that, at the

intervention of the friends and relatives of the couple, a settlement and compromise has

been arrived at in respect of pending impugned proceeding. They submit that there was

no material to sustain charges under Sections 312, 313 of the Penal Code at all as

would be evident from the charge sheet. They further submit that the parties have filed a

joint compromise application and draw the attention of this court to paragraphs 4 and 5

of the said joint compromise application.

The learned Public Prosecutor, High Court, Calcutta appearing on behalf of the

State, in his usual fairness, submits that if the private parties have settled their disputes
2

in order to lead their lives in future peacefully, the State would not come in the way of

such compromise or for that matter, quashing of such proceeding upon compromise.

I have heard the submissions of the learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the

parties and have gone through the petition alongwith annexures and through the joint

compromise application.

The victim-lady is personally present in court and the learned Counsel on her behalf

made submissions upon taking instructions from her.

In view of such settlement and compromise arrived at between the private parties

and in the interest of justice, the impugned proceeding present pending under Sections

498A/406 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code in CGR Case No.1921 of 2009, before

the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Alipore, South 24-Parganas is quashed upon

such compromise.

The revisional application is disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, is to be given to the

parties on usual undertaking.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation