IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21178 of 2007 1. HARI PANDIT son of Late Bulkan Pandit. 2. Rajesh Pandit son of Hari Pandit 3. Devendra Pandit son of Hari Pandit 4. Ravindra Pandit son of Hari Pandit 5. Usha Devi wife of Devendra Pandit 6. Prabha Devi wife of Gopal Pandit 7. Gita Devi wife of Ravindra Pandit 8. Sudama Devi wife of Hari Pandit All resident of village Madhopur Nayatola Bakhtiyarpur, P. S. Bakhtiyarpur, District Patna. 9. Ashok Pandit son of late Harihar Pandit 10. Kanta Devi wife of Ashok Pandit Both resident of village- Mohalla Kalyanpur, P. S. Biharsharif, District- Nalanda. … Petitioners. Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. Bhothai Pandit son of late Badri Pandit, resident of village Kathrari, P. S. Bind, District Nalanda. … Opposite parties. ----------- 4. 29.01.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the State. The prayer of the petitioner is for quashing of the First Information Report as also the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Bihar P. S. Case No. 394/2005 lodged under Section 304 (B), 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Counsel for the petitioners would however fairly submit that the police has already submitted charge- sheet after investigation. This Court would find that once 2 such charge-sheet has been submitted there would be no occasion to quash the F.I.R. Additionally the petitioner now having not placed on record the order taking cognizance cannot seek prayer for quashing of entire proceedings of the criminal case. The only remaining plea of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the informant of the case has subsequently sought to resile from his earlier allegation made in the first information report and infact the police has also not found any material in the case-diary and has mechanically submitted its charge-sheet against the petitioner. Regard being had to the aforementioned submission, this court would find that once the police has submitted charge-sheet, the only order taking cognizance can be called in question. Such order having not brought on record, this application by efflux of time has become infructuous. It is accordingly dismissed with an observation that it would be open for the petitioner to raise all there question at the time of framing of charge. kanchan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)