SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Raj Kishan Shaw vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 27 February, 2020

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICATION

Before:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAY SENGUPTA

C.R.R. 144 OF 2020
WITH
CRAN 333 OF 2020
RAJ KISHAN SHAW
VS.

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL ANR.

WITH
C.R.R. 148 OF 2020
WITH
CRAN 332 OF 2020
RAJ KISHAN SHAW ORS.

VS.

THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL ANR.

For the Petitioner: Mr. Srinjoy Sengupta

For the Opposite Party No.2: Mr. Abhijit Chowdhury

For the State: Mrs. Faria Hossain
Mrs. Baisali Basu
(In CRR 144 of 2020)

Mr. Swapan Banerjee
Mrs. Debjani Sahu
(In CRR 148 of 2020)

Heard on: 27.02.2020
Judgment delivered on: 27.02.2020

JAY SENGUPTA, J:
2

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.

A report dated 27.02.2020 filed by the Inspector-in-Charge of Howrah

Police Station is taken on record.

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.

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.

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
3

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.

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.

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.

I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels representing the

parties and have perused the revision petitions, connected applications and the

case diaries.

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.
4

The disputes appear to be substantially of private nature.

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.

With these observations, the two revision petitions and the connected

applications are disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the

parties expeditiously, if applied for.

(Jay Sengupta,J.)
SM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2020 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