ORDER 16.9.2008 — Heard Mr. Udgata, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. This revision is directed against the order dated 8.11.2007 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Cuttack in I.C.C.Case No. 315 of 2002 rejecting the petition filed by the petitioner for dismissal of the complaint. 3. At the outset, Mr. Udgata, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that during pendency of this criminal revision the parties have settled their dispute amicably out of the Court and on account of that the complainant-opposite party is no more interested to prosecute the complaint case. 4. Mr. Dash, learned counsel for the opposite party also admits the above fact and states that the matter has been settled outside the Court and the opposite party has already received Rs. 16,000/- in shape of a bank draft and, therefore, she is no more interested to prosecute the complaint case. 5. A joint affidavit has been filed today sworn to by the petitioner and the opposite party affirming therein that the disputes and differences between them have been sorted out and because of that the complainant does not want to prosecute the complaint. 6. In the instant case, cognizance has been taken against the petitioner under Section 406 IPC. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for both the parties as well as the averments made in the joint affidavit, this Court is of the view that no fruitful purpose will be served by allowing the proceeding to continue. Therefore, by applying the ratio decided in Sk. Khairur alias Sk. Khairul and others v. Kanhu Bar, (2004) 27 OCR 127, Kinakrushna v. Smt. Sunanda Behera, 2003 (II) OLR 492 and Sridhar Pani v. State of Orissa and another, 2003 (II) OLR 238 , this Court, quashes the proceeding in I.C.C.Case No. 315 of 2002 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Cuttack. 7. The CRLREV is accordingly disposed of. Urgent certified copy of the order be granted as per rules. CRLREV disposed of.