IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.29409 of 2007 1. Aftabuddin, Son of late Hasmuddin. 2. Dr. Luqman alias Md. Luqman, Son of Hasmuddin. 3. Master Islamuddin, Son of late Hasmuddin. 4. Iltaf Hussain, Son of late Hasmuddin. 5. Mehboob Alam, Son of Aftabuddin. 6. Bibi Muslima Khatoon, Wife of Aftabuddin. All residents of Village Bangdogra, Police station Thakurganj, District Kishanganj. ---------- Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Bibi Haseena Khatoon, Wife of Aftabuddin, Daughter of Khair Mohammad, Resident of Village Bengdogra, Police Station Thakurganj, Police Station Kishanganj. ------- Opp. Parties ----------- 4 10.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the complainant-opposite party no.2. The petitioners assail in this case an order taking cognizance for an offence under Section 323, 313 & 376 of the Indian Penal Code as also the revisional order affirming the order taking cognizance. This Court, in fact, having noticed the changed attitude of the parties as also in view of the subsequent development of the complainant-opposite party no.2 getting married to the petitioner no.1 and filing of a compromise petition for compounding of the offence, had issued notice. Pursuant thereto, the opposite party no.2 is represented by her counsel Md. Qumrul Hoda, who support the fact of the petitioner no.1 being married to the opposite party no.2 as also being looked after in a dignified manner by the petitioner no.1. In such a situation, when the original relationship has been restored between the parties and whatever grievance was made by the opposite party no. 2 has now lost its effectiveness due to passage of 2 time and change of circumstances, this Court in the end of justice would quash the entire prosecution including order taking cognizance as also the revisional order. It is, however, made clear that as this order has been passed basically on the subsequent development leading to a settlement outside the Court in which the petitioner no.1 has undertaken to not only treat the opposite party no.2 as a legally wedded wife and therefore if the petitioner no.1 or for that reason, any family member of the petitioner no.1 would create obstacle in the way of the opposite party no.2, this order shall not stand in the way of launching a fresh prosecution, may be for the same offence. With the aforementioned observations, this application is allowed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)