Md. Kamruddin And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16783 of 2011 (8) dt.05-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.16783 of 2011 ======================================================

1. Md. Kamruddin Son of Late Md. Safi.

2. Md. Ziyaul Son of Md. Kamruddin

3. Md. Alam Son of Md. Safi

4. Md. Samsuddin Son of Md. Safi

5. Zahana Khatoon Son of Md. Kamruddin

6. Md. Rashid @ Mangaru Miyan Son of unknown.

7. Md. Ekbal Hasan Son of Rashid @ Mangar Miyan. All are resident of Sarai, P.S. Sarai, District- Vaishali.

8. Md. Hadim .... .... Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Md. Jahangir S/O Md. Rashid R/O Village Sarai Afjal, P.S. Goraul, District- Vaishali.

.... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioners : Mr. Surendra Kishore Thakur For the Opposite Parties : Dr.Azit Kumar (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 05-09-2017 This Criminal Miscellaneous has been filed for quashing the order dated 22.03.2010 passed by the Sub. Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hajipur in Complaint Case No. 1904 of 2006/ Trial No. 1869 of 2010, whereby and whereunder, after finding prima-facie case to be made out against the petitioners under sections 323, 380 and 504 of the I.P.C. they have been ordered to be summoned.

It is submitted that Sabnam Khatoon, the daughter of petitioner no.1 Md. Kamruddin has filed Complaint Case No. 1891 of 2006 against Md. Jahangir & Ors under sections 323, 342,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.16783 of 2011 (8) dt.05-09-2017 379 and 498 (A) of the I.P.C. and section 3⁄4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur and by way of counter Md. Jahangir filed this complaint case wherein the petitioners have been ordered to be summoned. It is further submitted that now both the parties have compromised the case and the compromise petition has also been filed vide Annexure-4 at page-28 and the complainant has filed compromise petition to withdraw this case.

The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that the complainant has filed compromise petition stating therein to permit him to withdraw this complaint case.

In view of compromise arrived at between the parties the order dated 22.03.2010 now appears to be misuse of process of the court and accordingly the same is hereby quashed. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous is hereby allowed.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U