IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.42208 of 2007 1. DABLOO RAI, SON OF SHRI RAM LAKHAN PRASAD, VILLAGE SARARI, P.S. SHAHPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. 2. BABLOO RAI @ BABLOO KUMAR, SON OF SHRI RAM LAKHAN PRASAD, VILLAGE SARARI, P.S. SHAHPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. 3. SUDESHWAR PRASAD, SON OF LATE RAM JATAN PRASAD, VILLAGE KARAI, P.S. NAUBATPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. 4. KUNAL KUMAR, SON OF SHRI SUDESHWAR PRASAD, VILLAGE KARAI, P.S. NAUBATPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. 5. RISHI KUMAR, SON OF SHRI RAM SINGH, VILLAGE NAGWAN, P.S. MANER, DISTRICT PATNA. ... ... PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAM BHAWAN PRASAD, SON OF LATE SHEETAL RAI, VILLAGE SARARI, P.S. SHAHPUR, DISTRICT PATNA. ... ... OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- 6. 28.9.2010. No one appears on behalf of the petitioners either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment. Yesterday also, on call, prayer was made to adjourn the case. However, the case was passed over for the day with an indication that no further adjournment shall be granted. Shri Bhola Prasad, learned advocate for opposite party no.2 and Smt. Indu Bala Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor are present. Five petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of entire 2 N.H./ complaint case bearing No.167(C) of 2007 pending before Shri Sushil Kumar Dixit, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Danapur. It has also been prayed to quash the order dated 11.6.2007 by which the petitioners were summoned to face trial for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 323, 380 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code. I have perused the impugned order. I do not find any defect in the impugned order. It is not a fit case for exercising inherent jurisdiction in favour of the petitioners. Accordingly, the petition stands rejected. ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)