SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Mannan Agarwal & Anr vs Unknown on 20 September, 2018


24 20.09.2018

C.R.R. 1095 of 2018
CRAN 1329 of 2018
Ct. No. 29

In the matter of:- Mannan Agarwal Anr. …Petitioners.

Mr. Sandipan Ganguly,
Ms. Jeenia Rudra.

….for the petitioners.

Mr. Soumyajit Das Mahapatra
….for the opposite party/wife.

Mr. Saswatagopal Mukherjee (PP),
Mr. Saryati Datta.

…for the State.

This is an application for quashing of a proceeding in All Women

Police Station Kharagpur Case No.18 dated 24.02.2018 under Sections

498A/307/406/325/506/34 of the Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry

Prohibition Act corresponding to G.R. Case No.623 of 2018 pending before

the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Medinipur on the ground of

compromise and settlement of disputes between the private parties.

The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners

and the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2

submits that disputes that had given rise to the present case are essentially

private in nature. They submit that at the intervention of the common friends

and relatives the private parties have settled and compromised of the disputes

that gave rise to the present case. They further contend that private parties

have filed a joint compromise application seeking quashing of proceeding on

the ground of compromise. The learned Advocates refer to paragraphs 4 to 7

of the said petition.

The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the State submits that

the disputes are essentially private in nature and if the private parties want to

settle the same, the State is not going to come in the way.

I have heard the submissions of the learned Advocates appearing

for the parties and I have gone through the revisional application along with

the miscellaneous application. I have also gone through the Case Diary

produced by the learned Advocate for the State. In view of the settlement and

compromise arrived between the private parties and in the interest of justice

the impugned proceedings are quashed.

The revisional application is allowed.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the

parties expeditiously, if applied for.

(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Your email address will not be published.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