13.02.2026 Sl. No.13. D/L. Mithun. Ct.No.29. CRR/678/2025 with IA No:CRAN 5 of 2025, CRAN 6 of 2026 Calcutta Investment Company Limited & Anr. Vs. State of West Bengal & Anr. Mr. Sabyasachi Banerjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. Ayan Bhattacherjee, Sr. Adv., Mr. V.V.V. Sastry, Mr. Aseem Sah, Mr. C. Fernandez, Ms. Khushi Gupta, Mr. Apalak Basu, Mr. M. Jain, Mr. Sameer Sah …for the petitioners Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Mr. Debrup Bhattacharjee, Ms. Niharika Ahluwalia, Mr. Joyjeev Medhi … for the opposite party no.2/applicant no.3 in CRAN 6 of 2026. Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld.P.P., Mr. Arijit Ganguly, Ms. Nahid Ahmed …for the State The petitioners herein has prayed for quashing of proceeding of G.R. Case No.974 of 2021 presently pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Calcutta. The dispute in this case concerns 2,500 equity shares of Calcutta Investment Company Ltd, which are allegedly owned by opposite party/company who claimed to have lost them. An FIR was registered as per direction of Magistrate but after investigation police filed closure report on 24.04.2023 concluding that the dispute is civil in nature. On 18.03.2024 opposite party no.2 filed Protest Petition which was allowed 2 by the Court below by the impugned order. Challenging said order for further investigation passed by the Court below petitioners preferred the instant Application. However, it is submitted that during the pendency of the present proceeding the applicant and the private opposite party along with all other affected stake-holders had entered into a settlement on 4th December, 2025 whereby all disputes civil and criminal inter-se the parties including the subject matter of present FIR and the impugned proceeding herein have been fully and finally dissolved. In such circumstances, learned Counsel for the opposite party No.2 submits that the complainant does not want to proceed further with the instant proceeding and he wants that the instant proceeding be quashed as prayed by the petitioners. Learned Counsel for the State submits that since the parties have amicably settled their dispute which is purely private in nature, the State does not want to stand in their way of amicable settlement. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and both the opposite parties, it appears that the complainant/opposite party no.2 has decided not to adduce evidence in support of the imputations levelled in the complaint and, as such, the conviction of the present petitioners at the end of the trial is bleak. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and if their prayer for quashing the proceeding is refused only on the ground that some of the sections are not compoundable it may become counter-productive for their future co-existence and business relationship. I am also informed that both the parties are present in person today before the Court. 3 Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that this is a fit case where the proceeding is liable to be quashed invoking this Court’s jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 528 of the BNSS. In such view of the matter, CRR 678 of 2025 along with connected applications are allowed. The impugned proceeding being G.R. Case No.974 of 2021, presently pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Calcutta is hereby quashed. Parties to act on a server copy of this order duly collected from the official website of the Hon’ble High Court, Calcutta. ( Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J. )