Patna High Court
Shashi Shankar RoyversusThe State Of Bihar and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
The court quashed the order taking cognizance and the ensuing criminal proceedings in view of the compromise and full settlement.
Summary
Shashi Shankar Roy filed a criminal complaint (Case No. 2106 of 2014) in which the court took cognizance under Section 418 of the IPC and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner was dissatisfied that cognizance was not taken for other alleged offences and later reached a compromise with the accused regarding the Section 138 offence, receiving Rs. 3,75,000 as full and final settlement. A supplementary affidavit containing the compromise petition was filed, which the opposite parties accepted. The High Court, considering the compromise, set aside the earlier order dated 27.05.2015 that had taken cognizance and quashed all subsequent criminal proceedings. Consequently, the petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of a compromise and full settlement on criminal proceedings instituted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 418 of the IPC?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 418
- Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 138
Subjects
- compromise
- settlement
- quash
- cognizance
- Section 138 NI Act
- Section 418 IPC
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42966 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2106 Year-2014 Thana- BHAGALPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Shashi Shankar Roy Son of Late Banarsi Roy, Resident of Village -
Bhikhanpur, P.S. - Ishakchak, District - Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar and Ors
2. Alok Kumar Singh, Son of Dhananjay Singh,
3. Vijay Yadav, Son of Late Mohan Yadav,
4. Mritunjay Yadav, Son of Vijay Yadav,
5. Pakko Yadav, Son of Vijay Yadav, All are the resident of village - Rasulganj,
P.S. - Lodipur, District - Bhagalpur.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Swapnil Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
For the O.P. Nos. 2 to 5 : Mrs. Geeta Kumari Jha, Adv.
Mr. Ashuthosh Kumar. Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
15 06-02-2026 At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks
permission to file hard copy of the supplementary affidavit, soft
copy of which has already been filed.
2. Permission as sought above is granted.
3. Let the hard copy of the supplementary affidavit be
kept on record.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner filed Complaint Case No. 2106 of 2014, in which, by
the impugned order, cognizance has been taken under Section
418 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the Negotiable
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42966 of 2015(15) dt.06-02-2026
2/2
Instruments Act, but the petitioner was aggrieved by the non-
taking of cognizance under other serious offences. However,
due to the efforts made by the well-wishers of both the parties,
the petitioner’s main grievance with regard to the offence under
Section 138 of the N.I. Act has been redressed and he has
received Rs. 3,75,000/- as full and final settlement. With regard
to the said settlement, a supplementary affidavit has been filed,
annexing a copy of the compromise petition.
5. Learned counsel for the opposite parties Nos. 2 to 5
accepts the aforesaid factum of the compromise.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking
into account the compromise entered into by both the parties,
the order dated 27.05.2015, taking cognizance of the alleged
offences, and the subsequent entire criminal proceedings arising
pursuant to the said order, are hereby set aside/quashed.
7. Accordingly, the instant petition stands allowed.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
BKS/-
U T
Checking your session…