Amiya Kumar Patra Vs. the State of West Bengal and anr.

Amiya Kumar Patra vs The State of West Bengal and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Kolkata Decided Feb 22, 2010

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/856157

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/856157
Court: Kolkata High Court
Judge: Ashim Kumar Roy, J.
Decided On: Feb 22, 2010
Case Number: C.R.R. No. 4201 of 2006 and Cran No. 3093 of 2009
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 482; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 120B, 323, 379, 406, 420 and 506

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Amiya Kumar Patra

Advocate Asok Kumar Janah and ;Pampa Dey (Dhabal), Advs.

Respondent

The State of West Bengal and anr.

Advocate Mahenda Prasad Gupta, Adv. for O.P. No. 2

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 482; ;Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 34, 120B, 323, 379, 406, 420 and 506

Excerpt

- .....was taken by the accused by executing an agreement. thereafter, the complainant on several occasions requested the petitioner to execute the deed of sale but the accused in one pretext or other avoided execution of sale deed. thereafter, on 7th of september, 2006 at about 7.30 p.m. when the complainant went to the house of the accused/petitioner and offered to pay the balance amount and requested him to execute the sale deed, the complainant physically assaulted him and drove him out from his residence without either refunding the advance amount or by executing the sale deed. on the face of those allegations, it cannot be said no offence for which the court has taken cognizance has been made out. whether the allegations are true or false and whether the signature of the accused was taken in a blank paper and then the same has been converted to an agreement are all pure question of facts and cannot be gone into at this stage.this criminal revision has no merit and accordingly stands dismissed.in view of dismissal of the main criminal revisional application, the application for extension of interim order being cran no. 3093 of 2009 become infructuous and accordingly stands disposed of.criminal section is directed to deliver urgent photostat certified copy of this judgement to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

Full Judgment

Ashim Kumar Roy, J.

1. Invoking Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the petitioner has moved this Court for quashing of a case relating to the offences punishable under Sections 420/406/506/379/323/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code on the following grounds;

(a) The allegations are absolutely false.

(b) The dispute, if any, is civil in nature.

(d) The complainant never approached a competent Court for specific performance of contract.

2. Now, having gone through the allegations made in the complaint, I find it is the case of the complainant that towards the sale of a two storied building, the present petitioner took a total sum of Rs. 1,75,000/- from the complainant as advance. Such advance was taken by the accused by executing an agreement. Thereafter, the complainant on several occasions requested the petitioner to execute the deed of sale but the accused in one pretext or other avoided execution of sale deed. Thereafter, on 7th of September, 2006 at about 7.30 P.M. when the complainant went to the house of the accused/petitioner and offered to pay the balance amount and requested him to execute the sale deed, the complainant physically assaulted him and drove him out from his residence without either refunding the advance amount or by executing the sale deed. On the face of those allegations, it cannot be said no offence for which the Court has taken cognizance has been made out. Whether the allegations are true or false and whether the signature of the accused was taken in a blank paper and then the same has been converted to an agreement are all pure question of facts and cannot be gone into at this stage.

This criminal revision has no merit and accordingly stands dismissed.

In view of dismissal of the main criminal revisional application, the application for extension of interim order being CRAN No. 3093 of 2009 become infructuous and accordingly stands disposed of.

Criminal Section is directed to deliver urgent Photostat certified copy of this Judgement to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.

Same Court & Year Kolkata · 2010 Same Parties Amiya Kumar Patra vs The State of West Bengal and anr. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Ashim Kumar Roy, J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 482; ;Indian Pena...

Criminal