IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.23138 of 2007 1. Ram Sumiran Singh, 2. Chhotu Singh, 3. Ram Sagar Singh @ Ram Agar Singh, all sons of Late Chandrika Singh, 4. Subhash Kumar @ Phutu Singh @ Subhash Singh, son of Suresh Singh @ Vagthu Singh, village Rahatpur, PS Balia, Dist. Begusarai – petitioners. Vs. 1. The State of Bihar, 2. Ashok Kumar, son of Late Gunjo Singh village Rahatpur, PS Balia, Dist. Begusarai – 0pposite parties. 5 1.7.2009 The petitioners have filed this application for quashing the order, dated 24.1.2007 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in Complaint Case No. 815C/2006 by which cognizance has been taken for the offences under sections 323, 341 and 379 of the Penal Code. The facts of the case are that on 15.5.2006 during the Panchayat election an occurrence took place in which it is said that the petitioners and others had assaulted the complainant. It is also alleged that they snatched some money and watch from the complainant. This occurrence is said to have taken place at 2 in the afternoon and the complaint was filed on 16.5.2006. For the same occurrence station diary entry was made at the behest of opposite party no.2 in which it is stated that on 15.5.2006 at about two in the afternoon there was exchange of hot words between Ashok Kumar, Prabhat Kumar Singh and Ram Sumiran Singh. Later vide Annexure 2A, Ashok Kumar and Ram Sumiran Singh compromised the case for which an entry was made in the police station diary. It is also apparent from the pleadings in this case that the opposite party no.2 was a candidate for Mukhiya election standing against Ram Sumiran Singh. In fact he lost the 2 election and filed Election Case No.10/2001. Besides this, there was a proceeding under section 107 of the Cr.P.C. between the parties and several other litigations are pending for the reasons that both of them are political rival. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is only due to political rivalry that the case has been instituted against the petitioners. It is submitted that the complaint petition has been filed after a delay of one day whereas opposite party no.2 had made allegations against Ram Sumiran Singh vide Annexure 2 on the date on which the actual occurrence had taken place and as such it appears that the complaint petition has been filed out of vengeance against the petitioners. It is also submitted that all the offences are compoundable and the allegations against the petitioners of snatching money from the complainant or others appears to be absolutely concocted made for the purpose of making the case serious. In this case notice was issued to opposite party no.2 who refused to accept notice perhaps deliberately because he did not want to facilitate the disposal of this case. In any event this court finds that the case is of a petty nature which took place eight years ago out of political rivalry. In the circumstances, the parties should consider filing an application for compromising the matter in a case of this nature and end the dispute once and for all. However, this court would not interfere with the order of cognizance and, rather, directs that the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai should take steps to dispose of this matter at the earliest and if possible persuade the parties to 3 compromise the case. This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)