IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20727 of 2009 Guddu Prasad, son of Mohanji Prasad, Resident of village-Mill Road Mirganj, P.S. Mirganj, Distt Gopalganj … Petitioner Versus State Of Bihar ----------- 3 28-07-2011 Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the opposite party bringing the order dated 17.10.2008 passed in Confiscation Case No. 07 of 2008. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the state. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to withdraw this Cr. Misc. case as the final order has already been passed in Confiscation Case No. 07 of 2008. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor appearing for the state does not raise any objection in grant of permission to the petitioner to withdraw the present Cr. Misc. Case but he submits that a cost should be imposed upon the petitioner because he has placed wrong facts before this court at paragraph-6 of his petition. In my view, it is not a fit case in which the cost should be imposed upon the petitioner. Although the order dated 17.10.2008 passed in Confiscation Case No. 07 of 2008 reveals that notice in aforesaid case had been served upon the petitioner but it is not clear whether the aforesaid notice was validly served upon the petitioner or not. - 2 - Moreover, in view of the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this Cr. Misc. case. Accordingly, this Cr. Misc. Case stands dismissed as withdrawn. However, the petitioner may take proper steps for release of gas cylinders in accordance with law. AKV/- (Hemant Kumar Srivastava,J.)