JUDGMENT Jay Sengupta, J. - The Court: 2. This is an application for quashing of an investigational proceeding under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits as follows. At the intervention of common relations and family friends, a compromise and settlement was arrived at between the accused and the victim/defacto-complainant of all disputes that had led to the initiation of the impugned proceeding. A joint compromise application has also been filed in this regard. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defactocomplainant/victim submits as follows. A compromise and settlement has indeed been arrived at between the private parties and a joint compromise application has also been filed. An application for mutual divorce that has been filed before the learned appropriate forum, which is still pending. 5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that State would not come in the way if a settlement and compromise is arrived at between the private parties. 6. I have heard the submissions of the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners, the State and the victim/opposite party no.2 and have perused the revision petition and the case diary. 7. It appears that a settlement and compromise has indeed been arrived at between the private parties of the disputes that had led to the initiation of the present proceeding. 8. In view of the above and in the interest of justice, I quash the impugned proceeding on the ground of compromise and settlement. 9. With these observations, the revisional application and the connection application are disposed of. 10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.