Bijay Kumar Bhartia And ORS. v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR
25.02.2026 Sl. No.07.
& 08.
BD Ct.No.29.
CRR/148/2026 IA No. CRAN 1 of 2026 Balaram Panja Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
with CRR/428/2026 IA No. CRAN 1 of 2026 Bijay Kumar Bhartia & Ors.
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Ms. Jhuma Sen Ms. Aasthita Dutta Majumder Ms. Sikha Halder ... for the petitioner (in item nos. 7 & 8) Mr. Debasish Roy Mr. Koushik Kundu Mr. Soukteya Ganguly ... for the State (in item nos. 7) Mr. Debasish Roy Mr. Koushik Kundu Mr. Sourat Nandy ... for the State (in item nos. 8) Mr. Arindam Jana Mr. Yuvraj Chatterjee Mr. Rahul Surtari ... for the opposite party no. 2 (in item nos. 7 & 8) The report submitted by Sub Inspector of Maniktala Police Station dated 20th February, 2026 is taken on record. In the instant case the petitioner had prayed for quashing of the proceeding being GR Case No. 530 of 2024 presently pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah. During pendency of the investigation the parties have amicably
settled their disputes and to that extent they have filed one application being CRAN 1 of 2026.
In view of such settlement learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 submits that his client does not want to proceed further with the instant criminal proceeding being GR Case No. 530 of 2024 and therefore he prayed for quashing the impugned proceeding.
Learned counsel for the State submits that the dispute between the parties is private in nature and when they have settled their disputes amicably the State does not want to stand in their way. He further submits that concerned police station has submitted a report today, which discloses that opposite party no. 2 herein had also intimated the concerned police station that he made a settlement with the petitioner and therefore he does not want to proceed further with the case.
Having considered the aforesaid submissions made by the parties it appears to me that the defacto-complainant has decided not to support the imputations levelled in the complaint during trial as such there is hardly any chance of conviction at the end of the proceeding and as such I find that further continuance of the instant proceeding in view of aforesaid amicable settlement would a mere abuse of the process of the court.
In such view of the matter, CRR 148 of 2026 along with connected application being CRAN 1 of 2026 are allowed.
The impugned proceeding being GR Case No. 530 of 2024 pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sealdah is quashed.
In view of disposal of the instant application CRR 428 of 2026 along with connected application being 1 of 2026 also stands disposed of.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. ( Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J. )