Quashed

Bijay Kumar Agarwal @ Bijoy Kumar Agarwal and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Calcutta HC1 Mar 2021CRR/285/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court observed that the dispute between parties has been settled mutually, restoring peace. Consequently, the pending criminal proceeding was quashed, the offence was compounded, and the revisional application was disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Pending G.R. Case No. 548 of 2016 stands quashed; the offence under IPC Sections 418/420/34 read with Copyrights Act Sections 63/69 stands compounded.

Bijay Kumar Agarwal @ Bijoy Kumar Agarwal and Ors. Vs… — Cheating and Forgery | Calcutta HC (2021)

¶1

01.03.2021 Item no.10 Ct. No.42 CHC

¶2

C.R.R. No.285 of 2021

¶3

IA No. C.R.A.N.1 of 2021

¶4

(Physical Hearing)

¶5

In Re: An application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure1973.

¶6

In the matter of:-

¶7

Bijay Kumar Agarwal @ Bijoy Kumar Agarwal & ors.

¶8

… Petitioners

¶9

Mr. Koustav Bagchi

¶10

… for the petitioners

¶11

Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharya,

¶12

Ms. Manisha Sharma

¶13

…for the State

¶14

Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharyya,

¶15

Mr. Arup Sarkar

¶16

…for the opposite party no.2

¶17

Parties are represented through their learned advocates, the names of whom are shown above at the beginning of this ordersheet.

¶18

Ms. Bhattacharya, learned advocate representing the State submits that the police after investigation has already submitted charge-sheet making out a case under Sections 418/420/34 of

¶19

¶20

the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 63/69 of the Copyrights Act, 1957.

¶21

Mr. Koustav Bagchi, learned advocate representing the petitioners submits that mutually disputes have already been settled outside the Court and the C.R.A.N. application has accordingly been filed, which is also listed today, and there is sufficient reflection in the C.R.A.N. application, vide paragraph “6” about the mutual settlement already effected between the parties.

¶22

Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharyya, learned advocate representing the de facto complainant/opposite party no.2 submits that the disputes between the parties have already been settled and the de facto complainant has already received the money, stated to have been cheated.

¶23

Having considered the rival submission of the parties, it appears that the disputes have been settled mutually outside the Court and peace has restored between the parties.

¶24

When there has been settlement between the parties, the Court should not stand on the way. With the mutual settlement, there is further hardly anything left requiring any adjudication from this Court.

¶25

Pending G.R. Case No.548 of 2016 stands quashed. The offence complained of under Sections 418/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 63/69 of the Copyrights Act stands compounded.

¶26

The instant revisional application and connected application are also disposed of.

¶27

¶28

All parties shall act in terms of copy of this order downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶29

Urgent Xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶30

(Subhasis Dasgupta, J.)

Bijay Kumar Agarwal @ Bijoy Kumar Agarwal and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bijay Kumar Agarwal @ Bijoy Kumar Agarwal and Ors. v. State of West Bengal and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basudeb Pramanik Vs Pravha Ranjan Mondal and Another

Shamad Khan @ Samad Khan Vs State of West Bengal

Bablu Gazi @ Kabirul Vs State of West Bengal

M/S Gtpl Kolkata Cable an Dbroadband Pariseva Ltd. and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

M/S Gtpl Kilkata Cable and Broadband Pariseva Ltd. and Ors. Vs State of West Bengal and Anr.

Asoke Sharma@Ashoke Sharma Vs State of West Bengal