Rajender Prasad Gupta And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 9118 of 2015 Arising out of PS Case No. 469 Year-2014 Thana-Kankarbagh, District-Patna ===========================================================
1. Rajender Prasad Gupta, aged about 72 years, Son of Late Ganauri Prasad Gupta.
2. Ramesh Kumar, aged about 27 years, Son of Shri Rajender Prasad Gupta. Both residents of South Chandmari Road, Ram Govind Singh Path, P.S.- Kankarbagh, District-Patna.
...........Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Krishna Kumar, Son of Shri Rajender Prasad, resident of South Chandmari Road, Ram Govind Singh Path, P.S.-Kankarbagh, District-Patna. ..........Opposite Party/s ========================================================== Appearance:
For the Petitioner/s : None For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Anil Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP =========================================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10/- 21.08.2020 Nobody has appeared on behalf of the petitioners.
Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 is present. The State is represented by Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, learned APP. The present petition has been filed for quashing of the First Information Report of Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 469 of 2014, dated 05.10.2014, which has been registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It appears from FIR and from the petition that the informant of this case is none else, but the son of petitioner No. 1 and the brother of petitioner No. 2.
Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has informed this Court that a compromise has been effected between the parties and taking into account the aforesaid fact, the matter was directed to be listed in Chambers on 07.02.2020. Thereafter, because of the parties not appearing before the Court, the petition was adjourned for 17.03.2020. Regard being had to the fact that it is an old case wherein the investigation was never stayed by this Court, this Court directs that the factum of compromise between the parties be
brought to the notice of the Investigating Officer of this case, who shall take a call upon such petition and shall, if the assertion of the parties are correct that the dispute between the father and son has been resolved, close the proceedings. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J.) Praveen-II/- U T