Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 29503 (CAL)

GOUTAM LOSALKA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR

CRR/1700/2026 · 2026-07-20

Kausik Chanda

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

20.07.2026 Item no. 12 Ct. No.237 Suman C.R.R. 1700 of 2026 With CRAN 1 of 2026 Goutam Losalka and Another Vs. The State of West Bengal and Anr. Mr. Avik Ghatak Mr. Fahad Imam Mr. S. Kar Mr. Krishna Kant Sharma ……for the petitioners Ms. Radhika Misra Ms. Rajnandini Das ..for O.P. No.2. Mr. Subir Ganguly Mr. Sandeep Prasad Shaw ..for the State The petitioner filed this revisional application for quashing of the proceedings in connection with Kulti Police Station Case No.167 dated April 3, 2026, under Sections 316(5), 316(2), 318(4), 318(3), 344, and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 arising out of Complaint Case No.201 of 2026, and all other proceedings incidental thereto, including G.R. Case No.878 of 2026, presently pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Bardhaman. In view of the judgement reported at AIR 1965 Supreme Court 1433 (Velji Raghavji Patel v. The State of Maharashtra), this Court was of the prima facie view that nature of allegations as set out in the complaint did not specify the essential ingredients of the alleged offences. Accordingly, this Court by an an interim order dated April 23, 2026 stayed all further proceedings of the said case for a period of twelve weeks from the date of the order. However, today, it has been submitted by the learned advocates appearing for the parties that the dispute between them has been amicably settled and they have filed a joint compromise petition, being CRAN 1 of 2026 for quashing of the present proceedings. Upon consideration of the materials on record, this Court is of the view that the dispute between the parties is essentially commercial in nature and that a valid compromise has already been arrived at between them. In such circumstances, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. Having regard to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported at (2012) 10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh v. State of Punjab), this Court is inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash the present proceedings in the interest of justice. Accordingly, Kulti Police Station Case No.167 dated April 3, 2026, under Sections 316(5), 316(2), 318(4), 318(3), 344, and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 arising out of Complaint Case No.201 of 2026, and all other proceedings incidental thereto, 2 including G.R. Case No.878 of 2026, presently pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Bardhaman stands quashed in terms of the compromise recorded in CRAN 1 of 2026. Consequently, C.R.R. 1700 of 2026, along with CRAN 1 of 2026, stands disposed of. Urgent certified website copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance with the requisite formalities. (Kausik Chanda, J.) 3