IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.55270 of 2007 1.NAGENDRA SINGH 2. Kamlesh Singh 3. Satendra Singh All sons of Late Hari Sharan Singh, resident of village Tetarian, P.S.Udwant Nagar, District Bhojpur …… ……..Petitioners Versus 1..THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.Bharat Singh son of Late Kedar Singh, resident of village Tetaria, P.S.Udwant Nagar, District Bhojpur ….. ……Opp.Parties ----------- 6. 27.9.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.B.P.Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. Three petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 18.11.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.IV, Bhojpur, Ara, in Sessions Trial No. 80 of 2004. By the said order, the petition filed on behalf of the petitioners under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was rejected by the learned trial court. It appears from the record that on earlier occasion on the basis of petition filed for discharge the same was allowed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhojpur, Ara. Aggrieved with the order of discharge, opposite party no.2 had preferred quashing application Vide Cr. Misc.No. 29169 of 2004. After hearing the parties by order dated 29.1.2007 Cr.Misc.No. 29169 of 2004 was allowed by this Court and the matter was remitted back to the 2 court below to reconsider the materials available on record, within the parameter of Sections 227 and 228 of the Code of Criminal procedure and pass fresh order on the point of charge. The order dated 29.1.2007 has been brought on record as annexure-5 to the petition. Against the order passed by this Court, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 2193 of 2007 which was dismissed on 30.4.2007. The order of Hon’ble Supreme Court has been brought on record as annexure-6 to the petition. I have perused the impugned order. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is of the view that while rejecting the discharge petition, the trial Judge has committed no error. The petition stands rejected. Keeping in view the fact that the matter remained pending before this Court since 2007, it is desirable to direct the court below to proceed with the case expeditiously so that the case may come to its logical end without any further delay. Md.S. ( Rakesh Kumar, J.)