30.7.2026 3 sb CRR 2335 of 2026 with CRAN 1 of 2026 Vipul Dalmia Vs. The State of West Bengal & Anr. Ms. Sonali Panda Mr. Dipendra Nath Chunder … for the petitioner Mr. Khushal Mittal … for the O.P. no. 2 Mr. Imran Siddiqui …for the State Report submitted by the Officer-in-charge, Gariahat Police station is taken on record. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the proceeding being CGR case no. 799 of 2019, presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 8th Court, Alipore. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid proceeding, learned counsel for the petitioner preferred the instant application contending that the petitioner and the private opposite party were married on 7th February, 2010 according to the Hindu Rites and Customs and separated on 13th October, 2017. Thereafter, the opposite party no. 2 filed a complaint on 8.3.2019 against the petitioner and his parents for commission of alleged offence under Section 509 and 120B of the IPC. After completion of investigation, police submitted charge-sheet against the petitioner but discharged the other two accused persons who are parents of the petitioner. He further submits that due to intervention of elder members in the family from both sides, 2 the disputes between the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2 have been mutually settled outside court and to that extent, they have filed one connected application being CRAN 1 of 2026 and they have also filed consent terms in the divorce proceeding. In view of the mutual settlement between the petitioner and the opposite party no. 2, the petitioner counsel submits that the opposite party no. 2 does not want to prosecute the petitioner any further and therefore, further continuance of the impugned proceeding against the petitioner would be nothing but a mere abuse of process of the court. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 on instruction submits that the opposite party no. 2/defacto- complainant has decided not to support the imputations levelled in the complaint in view of amicable settlement by and between the parties and as such, both the parties have prayed before this court for quashment of the said proceeding. Learned counsel for the State placesd a report sent by the Officer-in-charge, Gariahat Police Station, which discloses that the defacto-complainant is not willing to proceed with the case any more, which she intimated through email on 6.7.2026 and submits that since the parties have amicably settled their private dispute outside court in the interest of their future peaceful life, the State does not stand in their way. 3 Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and that in view of the amicable settlement arrived at by and between the parties, the opposite party no. 2 has also decided not to support the imputations levelled against the petitioner, I find that the chance of conviction of the present petitioner is bleak even if the trial is allowed to continue for its conclusion. Therefore considering the fact that both the parties have prayed for quashment of the proceeding and since the opposite party no. 2 has decided not to adduce evidence in support of the imputations leveled in the complaint, I find that further continuance of the impugned proceeding against the petitioner would be nothing but a mere abuse of process of the court and therefore, this is a fit case where the proceeding is liable to be quashed invoking this court’s jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS. In view of above, CRR 2335 of 2026 along with CRAN 1 of 2026 are allowed. The impugned proceeding being CGR case no. 799 of 2019, presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 8th Court, Alipore is hereby quashed. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities. (Dr. Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.)