JUDGMENT Sujit Barman Roy, J. Heard the ld. Counsel for the petitioners as well as the Id. Counsel for the opposite party No.2, complainant. I have also heard the Id. Counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner No.1 as well as the complainant are personally present in the court. At the instance of the coniplainant being the wife of the petitioner No.1, a case being Durgapur P. S. Case No. 117 of 2002 under sections 498A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. Meanwhile, the chargesheet has been filed. 3. However, the petitioner No.1 and opposite party No.2 being husband and wife have already amicably settled their dispute and resumed their conjugal life and living together as husband and wife. 4. In these circumstances, the complainant does not like to press this case any further. According to the petitioner No.1 and the complainant, as they have compromised the matter between themselves, this case should not be allowed to continue, as if it is allowed to continue it may vitiate the relationship between them. The case is not compoundable under section 320 Cr. P. C. 5. In these circumstances, petitioner as well as complainant pray that this case may be quashed so that the petitioner No.1 and the complainant may peacefully live as husband and wife. 6. In these circumstances and in the greater interest of justice, I allow this application and quash the aforesaid case which was subsequently registered as G.R. Case No. 517, of 2002 which is now pending before the Id. SDJM, Durgapur, Burdwan. 7. With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of. Application allowed. Proceeding quashed.