Criminal proceedings should not continue if they arise from a civil dispute and lack criminal elements, as this constitutes an abuse of process.

JUDGMENT :

SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL), J.

1. The present revisional application has been preferred praying for quashing of proceeding in G.R. Case No. 600/18 arising out of Bowbazar Police Station Case No. 163/2018 under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate 14th Court, Calcutta.

2. The petitioner’s case is as follows:

“The petitioner, aged about 50 years, is a businessman by profession, residing permanently at the address mentioned in the cause title. That sometime in 2017, the petitioner came in contact with the opposite party no. 2 through one of his agents namely, Partha Mukherjee, who showed the said property being premises no. 18/2/26, Uday Sankar Sarani, postal address being DT-14, Golf Green Urban Complex, Phase 1, Kolkata-700095 to the opposite party no. 2 and his wife. Thereafter, due to a misunderstanding between the petitioner on one hand and the opposite party no. 2 and his wife on the other hand, the opposite party no. 2 lodged a written complaint, which was registered as Bowbazar Police Station Case NO. 163/2018 dated 31.05.2018 under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code. The parties held several discussions and mutually agreed to settle the disputes in an amicable manner and to that effect, the parties signed a Deed of Cancellation on 20.07.2018. In the said Deed of Cancellation, the opposite party no. 2 has expressly declared that he has received the entire amount of Rupees 1 (one) crore 10 (ten) lacs, which the petitioner had to incur in order to make the said premises habitable after demolition/alternation carried out by the opposite party no. 2. On 18.07.2018, the opposite party no. 2 and his wife made a representation to the Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime), Kolkata and expressed their desire to put an end to the ongoing criminal proceeding instituted by them against the petitioner, which was duly received by the office of Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime), Kolkata on 20.07.2018.”

3. In spite of due service, the opposite party no. 2 is not represented.

4. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor, who has placed the case diary.

5. It appears from the materials in the case diary, more specifically the letter sent by the de facto complainant to the Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime), Kolkata on 18th July, 2018, that the entire dispute had been amicably settled and the deal has been cancelled and that he has received the total amount paid by him on full satisfaction from the petitioner herein and that he has no grievance or claim in any manner. A Deed of Cancellation cancelling the agreement between the parties was duly executed.

6. It is clarified by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the initial agreement between the parties was dated 11.12.2017 and the Deed of Cancellation is dated 20th July, 2018.

7. Subsequently, a statement of the complainant was recorded by the investigating officer on 20.02.2024 wherein the de facto complainant has stated that he wants to pursue the case for the balance amount along with interest.

8. In Sanjeev Kapoor Vs. Chandana Kapoor, AIR 2020 SC 1064, on 19 February, 2020, the Supreme Court held:

“17. Learned counsel for the appellant has also referred to judgment of this Court in Smt. Mahua Biswas vs. Swagata Biswas and another, (1998) 2 SCC 359. In the above case, in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. parties compromised and started living together but later fell apart. An objection was raised by the husband that order of maintenance could not be revived with which High Court agreed. This Court revived the maintenance application by allowing the appeal. In paragraph 3 following was held:

“3. The matter can be viewed from either angle.

It can be viewed that there was a genuine effort by the wife to rehabilitate herself in her matrimonial home but in vain. The previous orders of maintenance in a manner of speaking could at best be taken to have been suspended but not wiped out altogether.