IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.241 of 2007 SHANTI SWARUP SHARMA Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- For the petitioner: Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate. For the M.R.D.A. : Mr.G.P. Ojha,Advocate. For the State : Dr.Kumar Amotesh, A.C. to G.A.6. 10 5.3.2009 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the State including the counsel for the Muzaffarpur Regional Development Authority, hereinafter to be referred to as “M.R.D.A.” The counsel submits that a complaint was made to M.R.D.A. alleging that one Shanti Swarup Singh have constructed some rooms on a piece of land without sanction of the authority which has been given to one tenant Captain Jai Narain Nishad. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint MRDA got a complaint case lodged as Complaint Case No.28-1/91 contained in Annexure-2. Learned Magistrate took cognizance of offence and summoned the accused to face trial. Learned counsel submits that he is not Shanti Swarup Singh rather he is Shanti Swarup Sharma , son of Late Siv Swarup Sharma. Learned counsel further submits that he has filed a Photostat copy of the khatiyan to show that the land in question does not belong to the plot and he has no concern with Plot no.359 situated in Ward No.28. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner had different type of business and in that connection he had gone abroad also for some time. He submits that , in fact, the case stood closed on 6.1.2007 in view of order dated 6.1.07 passed by the concerned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Muzaffarpur.He further 2 submits that it would further appear from that order that the prosecution failed to produce any witness and no further date was fixed in the case. However, the Court ordered that permanent warrant be issued against the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that he has been unnecessarily roped in the instant case. This Court by order dated 9.7.2007 observed that no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with complaint case no.94/98 pertaining to Trial No.1722 of 2006. It will be open to the petitioner to state before the court concerned that the prosecution is misconceived against him. It will also be open to the M.R.D.A. to file an appropriate application regarding the factual aspects. In case such petition is filed by any of the parties, the learned trial court would proceed in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations and direction this writ application is disposed of. Anilksinha (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)