Anil Kumar Damodar @Mr Anil Damodar Kurup v. State Of West Bengal And ANR

Form J(1) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction Appellate Side Present :

The Hon'ble Justice Bibek Chaudhuri CRR 2809 of 2022 With CRAN 1 of 2022 Anil Kumar Damodar @ Mr. Anil Damodar Kurup Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Mr. Apalak Basu Mr. Subhankar Chakraborty ..for the petitioner Mr. Srinjoy Sengupta Mr. R. Makur ..for the opposite party Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee, Ld. P.P.

Mr. Sandip Chakraborty ...for the State Item No.03 Heard & Judgment on:

12.09.2022

Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

The petitioner/accused has filed the instant revision praying for quashing of the proceeding in connection with Anandapur Police Station Case No.15 of 2021 dated 12th January, 2021 under Sections 408/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code corresponding to ACGR case No.195 of 2021 presently pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas. Be it noted here that in connection with the above mentioned case, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against the petitioner only under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code.

During pendency of the instant revision the parties have settled their dispute amicably because of the fact that the dispute arose out of a commercial transaction and such dispute has been amicably settled. The Officer-in-charge of Anandapur Police Station was directed to examine and record a statement of the de facto complainant /opposite party to ascertain as to whether the dispute has been voluntarily settled by the de facto complainant or not. The Officer-in-charge of Anandapur Police Station has filed a report, on perusal of which it is ascertained that the dispute between the parties has been settled and the parties do not want to proceed with the above mentioned criminal case.

In view of such circumstances, ACGR case No.195 of 2021 presently pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore, South 24 Parganas be quashed. It is pointed out by Mr. Apalak Basu, learned advocate for the petitioner that in order dated 22nd August, 2022 his name was recorded as an advocate representing the opposite party. However, Mr. Basu and Mr. Subhankar Chakraborty, advocates represent the petitioner. On the other hand, Mr. Srinjoy Sengupta, advocate represents the private opposite party and Mr. Sandip Chakraborty, advocate represents the State of West Bengal, opposite party No.1. Order dated 22nd August, 2022 be read as hereinabove so far as it relates to representation of the parties on 22nd August, 2022 as well as this day.

The instant revision and the connected application are, thus, disposed of.

(Bibek Chaudhuri, J.)