Kalam Ansari v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44083 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2016 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT District- West Champaran ====================================================== Kalam Ansari Son of Late Bulai Ansari, Resident of Village Sargatia, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Maujedar Mian, Son of Lat Thag Mian, Resident of Village Sargalia, P.S. Gopalpur, District- West Champaran.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P.

For the O.P. No. 2 :

Mr. Satyapal Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-11-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present quashing application has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 29.06.2016 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Bettiah, West Champaran in Trial No. 2684 of 2016 in connection with Complaint Case No. 249 of 2016 whereby cognizance of the offences has been taken under Sections 420, 120(B), 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the complaint

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44083 of 2017(3) dt.23-11-2023 2/3 petition, it would manifest that the dispute was purely civil.

4. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 submits that he has instruction to make submissions on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 that the case has been compromised in between the parties and the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to pursue with the case and will have no objection in the event if the order dated 29.06.2016 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Bettiah, West Champaran in Trial No. 2684 of 2016 in connection with Complaint Case No. 249 of 2016 whereby cognizance of the offences under Sections 420, 120(B), 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken is quashed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner also concurs with the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.

6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 that he does not have any objection in the event if the order taking cognizance is quashed, as such, the order dated 29.06.2016 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Bettiah, West Champaran in Trial No. 2684 of 2016 in connection with Complaint Case No. 249 of 2016 whereby cognizance of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44083 of 2017(3) dt.23-11-2023 3/3 offences under Sections 420, 120(B), 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken, is hereby quashed.

7. Accordingly, this application stands allowed. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T