← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56202/2018disposed

Sunil Pandit @ Sunil Kumar Pandit v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2026-01-28Mr. Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56202 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2018 Thana- GANGTA District- Munger ====================================================== Sunil Pandit @ Sunil Kumar Pandit S/o Matuki Pandit, Resident of VillageDhanna Dih, P.S.- Gangta, District- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

State of Bihar 2.

Rinku Kumari, D/o Prabhakar Pandit, R/o Dhanna Dih, P.S.- Gangta, District- Munger.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Giri, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026 This petition has been filed for quashing of order dated 28.07.2018 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in connection with Gangta P.S. Case No.38 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. No.921 of 2018 registered under Sections 341, 323, 354(B), 376, 511, 504/34 of the I.P.C. against this petitioner and another accused Ajab Lal Pandit whereby and whereunder cognizance for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 342, 354(B), 504/34 of the I.P.C. and under Section 8 of the POCSO Act has been taken by the court concerned against them and as such petitioner and another accused were summoned to face trial.

2. As per the report vide letter no.5839 dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56202 of 2018(3) dt.28-01-2026 2/2 29.08.2025 submitted by learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Munger, both the accused persons, namely, Sunil Pandit (petitioner) and Ajab Lal Pandit have been acquitted on 17.02.2024.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this case may be disposed of as it has become infructuous.

4. Learned APP for the State has no objection to this prayer of the petitioner.

5. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of as having become infructuous.

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) Harish/- U T