IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.496 of 2007 KAILASH RAI @ KAILASH PRASAD Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 6 28.10.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. In the case, permission is sought by filing I.A.no.2165/2009 and I.A.NO. 2166/2009 to compromise the case in Bakhtiarpur P.S.Case No. 187/96 which falls under section 420 IPC. Allegation is about cheating part of ancestral property by getting his name mutated by the petitioner which is resolved now and sweet relation is developed. So in my view also it appears that this sweet relation should continue, no pressure of any kind or force is seen. Learned counsel of both the parties are present here to corroborate the compromise. Accordingly, parties are permitted to compromise the case. Compromise petition is already there on record which is accepted. Conviction and sentence is recorded by Sub- divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barh and thereafter Additional Sessions Judge-3, Barh. In the result, the revision application - 2 - is allowed and the judgment and order dated 24.1.2007 passed by Sri Ajay Kumar Sinha-II, Additional Sessions Judge-III, Barh (Patna) in Cr.Appeal No. 147/05 affirming the judgment and order dated 29.8.2005 passed by Sri Sudhakar Singh, Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barh in G.R.No. 893/2006/T.R.No. 913/2005 convicting the petitioner under section 420 IPC and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for two years is set aside. The above named petitioner is acquitted of the offence under section 420 IPC in the aforesaid case. (Mandhata Singh,J.) AI