IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24528 of 2011 1. Shashi Bhushan Mandal, S/o Surya Narayan Mandal, 2. Sheo Shankar Mandal, S/o Sita Ram Mandal, Both are R/o Nirmali, P.S.-Pipra, District-Supaul. ………..Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Hari Nandan Mandal, S/o Awadh Mandal, R/o Village-Nirmali, P.S.- Pipra, District-Supaul. ……….Opp. Parties. ----------- 2. 25.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. The petitioners have come against an order by which their application filed under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for discharge of facing trial. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on the basis of material collected in course of investigation, the petitioners would not be prosecuted for offence under Section 307, 379 of the Indian Penal Code. In this case, by order dated 19.11.2001 cognizance of the offence was taken and 23 persons were summoned to face trial. The informant of the case, thereafter, filed a revision before the Sessions Court, Saharsa and by order dated 31.1.2002, Sessions Judge, Saharsa remanded the matter to the learned C.J.M., Supaul to pass fresh order. Thereafter, on 12.12.2004, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul summoned all 25 accused persons in a case in which cognizance has been taken for offence under Sections 379 and 307 of the IPC. The accused persons thereafter filed a revision before the 2 Sessions Court, Saharsa, against the order dated 12.12.2004. The Sessions Court dismissed the revision preferred on behalf of the accused persons. The petitioners thereafter, came before this Court against the order dated 9.11.2006 passed by the Sessions Judge under Section 482 Cr.P.C. However, the High Court by order dated 19.9.2007 dismissed the application filed on behalf of the accused persons for quashing the order dated 9.11.2006. It appears that thereafter, the petitioners preferred an application under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 5.4.2010, which has been rejected by the order impugned dated 3.5.2011. Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and the State as also after going through the order passed by the A.D.J., FTC-IV, Supaul in Sessions Trial No. 14 of 2010, I find no apparent illegality in the order. Hence, the same is dismissed. Sanjeet/ (Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.)