Narayan Prasad @ Narayan Kumar Prasad @ Sonu And ORS v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72220 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.

Narayan Prasad @ Narayan Kumar Prasad @ Sonu Son of surendra prasad. 2.

Aaryan @ Aaryan Kumar Sinha @ Ramauli Son of Gopal Prasad, Resident of Village- 63/21 A Ground Floor, Flat No. 02, Ekanir Building, Damdam, Post Office Police Station- North 24 Pargana, Near Art College, Motijhil, Kolkata- 700074.

3.

Rakesh Patel, Son of Bhushan Prasad.

4.

Rekha Devi, Wife of Rakesh Patel.

5.

Tushar Patel @ Nikku, Son of Rakesh Patel, 6.

Poonam Devi, Wife of Surendra Prasad, Petitioner No. 1, 3 to 6 are resident of Village- Subjpur, Post Office Police Station- Khagaul, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar.

2.

Jyoti Devi, Daughter of Sadanand Singh, Resident of Village- Bhawanganj, District- Patna, Wife of Shankar Shambhu Prasad @ Monu Resident of Mohalla- 63/21 Ground Floor, Flat No. 02, Ekanir Building Damdam, Post Office Police Station- Damdam, District- North 24 Pargana, West Bengal Near Indian Art College Motijhil, Kolkata- 700074. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arbind Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Smt. Sahin Begam, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 06-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The present Cr. Misc. Application has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the order dated 02.05.2018 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Masaurhi, Patna in Complaint Case No.204(C) of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72220 of 2018(3) dt.06-07-2026 2/2 2018 by which cognizance under Sections 323, 380, 354, 427, 504 of the I.P.C. has been taken against the petitioners and others.

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

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State has no objection to this prayer of the petitioners.

5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the present Cr. Misc. Application stands disposed of as it has become infructuous.

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