IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.4181 of 2010 AMIT KUMAR & ORS . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR . with Cr.Misc. No.4782 of 2010 AMIT KUMAR & ORS . Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR . ----------- 2/ 06/04/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The allegations in Cr. Misc. No.4782/10 are under Sections- 323, 337, 147 and 149 of Indian Penal Code while those in Cr. Misc. No.4181/10 are under Sections- 427, 323 and 342/34 of Indian Penal Code arising out of Sachivalaya P.S. Case No.101/07(G.R. No.5151/07) and Sachivalaya P.S. Case No.99/07 (G.R. No.5148/07) both pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class at Patna. The defence is of compoundable offences when the parties are willing for a compromise. If that be the correct position in facts, this Court can do no better than quote the following extract from paragraph 5 and 6 of the judgement of the Supreme Court in ( 2008) 4 SCC 582 (MADAN MOHAN ABBOT Versus STATE OF PUNJAB). “5. It is on the basis of this compromise that the application was filed in the High Court for quashing of proceedings which has been dismissed by the impugned order. We 2 notice from a reading of the FIR and the other documents on record that the dispute was purely a personal one between two contesting parties and that it arose out of extensive business dealings between them and that there was absolutely no public policy involved in the nature of the allegations made against the accused. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the light of the compromise and also in the light of the fact that the complainant has on 11-1-2004 passed away and the possibility of a conviction being recorded has thus to be ruled out. 6. We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilized in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.” There is no occasion for this Court to entertain this application under Section-482 Cr.P.C. when the petitioners have an equally efficacious remedy before the court below itself. This Court declining interference disposes the matters. KC/ ( Navin Sinha, J.)