Quashed

Tarun Kr Natta v. State of West Bengal & Anr.

Calcutta HC5 May 2022CRR/905/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed criminal proceedings for cheating and criminal breach of trust arising from a loan dispute. Relying on the Supreme Court's guidance in Laxmi Narayan, the Court held that since the parties had amicably settled the financial debt and the complainant is no longer inclined to proceed, the criminal case stands quashed under Section 482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

The GR Case No.5772 of 2014 and related applications are quashed; the petitioner is to be discharged from bail bond by the competent Magistrate.

Tarun Kr Natta Vs State of West Bengal & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Calcutta HC (2022)

¶1

05.05.2022 Sl. 8 Court No.40 SD

¶2

C.R.R. 905 of 2017 With CRAN 5 of 2018 (Old CRAN 1082 of 2018) With CRAN 7 of 2020 (Old CRAN 637 of 2020)

¶3

In the matter of: Tarun Kumar Natta

¶4

….petitioner. Mr. Kumarjyoti Tewari Ms. Rajlakshmi Ghatak Mr. Aniruddha Tewari …for the petitioner. Mr. Sanjoy Bardhan Ms. Amita Gaur …for the State. Mr. Dhananjay Banerjee Mr. Tanmoy Khan Ms. Oindrila Ghosh

¶5

…for the petitioner. …for the State. …for the Opposite Party No.2.

¶6

This is an application for quashing GR Case No.5772 of 2014 arising out of Nimta Police Station Case No.255 of 2014 dated October 9, 2014, under Sections 420/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas.

¶7

It has been jointly submitted by the parties before this Court that the dispute between the parties is arising out of a financial transaction whereby the opposite party no.2 advanced a sum of Rs.1 lakh on February 19, 2010, as a loan to the petitioner.

¶8

It has been further submitted jointly by the parties that the dispute between the parties has now been settled amicably. The petitioner had repaid opposite party no.2 a sum of Rs.1 lakh by cheque as a full and final settlement between the parties. The opposite party no.2 is no more willing to proceed with the criminal case in view of the settlement arrived at.

¶9

The relevant investigating officer has also filed a report before this Court, wherefrom it appears that the opposite party no.2 admitted that such payment had been made by the

¶10

¶11

petitioner.

¶12

Learned advocate representing the opposite party no.2 also has made over to this Court an instruction from his client, indicating that the opposite party no.2 is not inclined to proceed further with the criminal case.

¶13

Let the instruction and the report from the police be kept with the record.

¶14

It has been held by the Supreme Court in the case reported

¶15

at (2019) 5 SCC 688 ( State of Madhya Pradesh -Vs- Laxmi Narayan ) as follows:-

¶16

“ 15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:

¶17

15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the noncompoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;

¶18

15.5. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of noncompoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise, etc.”

¶19

In view of the aforesaid, I find no justification in continuation of the present criminal case and accordingly, GR

¶20

¶21

Case No.5772 of 2014 arising out of Nimta Police Station Case No.255 of 2014 dated October 9, 2014, under Sections 420/406/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas stands quashed.

¶22

The petitioner may be discharged from his bail bond by the learned Magistrate in the Court below.

¶23

Accordingly, CRR 905 of 2017, CRAN 5 of 2018 (Old CRAN 1082 of 2018) and CRAN 7 of 2020 (Old CRAN 637 of 2020) stand disposed of.

¶24

(Kausik Chanda, J.)

Tarun Kr Natta v. State of West Bengal & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Kr Natta v. State of West Bengal & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Surajit Das Vs Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation

Electrosteel Steels Ltd. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Abir Chatterjee Vs State

Soma Koley Vs Rajesh Koley

Prabha Ranjan Chowdhury & Anr. Vs State of West Bengal & Ors.

Sariful Islam Vs Jesmin Begum & Anr.