Shusen Roy@Sushen Roy v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR
20.06.2025 Item no. 01.
Court No.2.
Rakib In the High Court at Calcutta Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction CRR 115 of 2025 Shusen Roy @ Sushen Roy.
VS State of West Bengal & Anr.
Mr. Amit Saha.
......for the Petitioner.
Mr. Gopal Roy.
...for the Opposite Party no.2.
Mr. Aditi Shankar Chakraborty, Ld. APP, Mr. Aniruddha Biswas.
...for the State.
Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and defacto complainant are present. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner as well as the de-facto complainant/opposite party no.2 that they have amicably settled their differences and disputes which arose out of family feud.
On such submissions being made on an earlier occasion on 17.06.2025, this Court directed Mr. Biswas, learned advocate appearing for the State to communicate with the Inspector-inCharge, Bhaktinagar Police Station for engaging an officer who would record the statement of the de-facto complainant and a declaration be taken from her in respect of the submissions advanced before this Court for settlement of dispute.
Today a report has been submitted by the learned advocate appearing for the State which encloses the declaration of Bani Chakraborty as well as the statement of Bani Chakraborty recorded by Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Bhaktinagar Police Station. The sum and substance of such statement, which has been recorded reflects that in the year 2024 the present petitioner Shusen Roy @ Sushen Roy and the de-facto complainant Bani Chakraborty have amicably settled the dispute in the year 2024. Further the main thrust of contention is that the case was initiated by Bani Chakraborty as Shusen Roy @ Sushen Roy tried to forcefully and illegally capture and occupy the wine shop after the demise of husband of the de facto complainant.
Having considered the nature of the dispute which is exclusively private and personal in nature and relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh -Vs. - State of Punjab & Anr., (2010) 15 SCC 118, I am of the view that the consequent change of circumstances which is an amicable settlement do not warrant further continuance of the Bhaktinagar Police Station case no. 951 of 2022 dated 02.09.2022 under Section 341/420/506/120B of the Indian Penal Code and the same as such is hereby quashed. Consequently, the revisional application being CRR 115 of 2025 is allowed.
Pending application, if any, is consequently disposed of.
Report submitted by the State be kept with the record. All parties shall act in terms of server copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. (Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)