IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.38309 of 2009 1. MD.MAJID MIAN, son of late Abdul Karim @ Sutta Mian 2. Jubaida Khatoon, wife of Md. Majid Mian 3. Md. Hafiz @ Abdul Hafij, son of Md. Majid Mian All are resident of village Agari, P.S. Babubarhi, District Madhubani Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 2.4.2010 Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the State. The petitioner has filed this application for modification of the order dated 1.5.2009 by taking a plea that the petitioners in compliance of the said order had gone to surrender in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhubani on 26.5.2009 but when they came to know that the compromise affected between their son, also accused in this case, with their daughter-in-law, the complainant- O.P.No.2, had failed on account of complainant getting married to one Md. Moin, they withdrew their surrender application. It has now been submitted that on account of the aforementioned subsequent event this Court should modify the order dated 1.5.2009. The order dated 1.5.2009 was passed in view of the submission made by the 2 counsel for the petitioner recording therein that the relationship between the son of petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 had improved and compromise petition was filed by the informant containing the signature of all the accused persons including the petitioners which by itself would be the proof of the fact that such compromise was already arrived at. This Court in fact having recorded such factum of compromise from the compromise petition on record had only left the Magistrate to verify the correctness of the plea of the petitioners as with regard to recording of the compromise, inasmuch as the offence under section 498A I.P.C. was/is a compoundable offence. Thus, the order which was passed on 1.5.2009 was based on the materials on record and also on an impression created by the counsel for the petitioner and such order cannot be modified on account of any subsequent event including one which has been raised in this application that the informant has already been married to one Md. Moin. Counsel for the petitioner would 3 inform that now the petitioner no.1 has already been arrested. That being so, now petitioners no. 2 and 3 must surrender and seek their prayer for regular bail. With the aforementioned observation, this application is dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/