CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13811 OF 2000 ---- In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. ---- 1. DR. ARUN KUMAR BARNWAL, SON OF RAM PRASAD BARNWAL. 2. DR. ANITA BARNWAL @ ANITA KUMARI, WIFE OF DR. ARUN KUMAR BARNWAL. BOTH RESIDING AT QUARTER NO.17, M.C.P.W., DOCTOR’S HOSTEL, PATNA MEDICAL COLLEGE & HOSPITAL, P.S. PIRBAHORE, DISTRICT PATNA. 3. AJIT KUMAR, SON OF RAM PRASAD BARNWAL. 4. NEELAM @ NEELAM KUMARI @ NEELU @ NEELIMA, WIFE OF AJIT KUMAR. BOTH RESIDENTS OF RAM DULARI SADAN, RAJIV NAGAR, P.S. PATLIPUTRA, DISTRICT PATNA. ... ... PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. YASHODA DEVI, WIFE OF LATE BHUWNESHWER PRASAD BARNWAL, RESIDENT OF MOHALLA- BIHARI SAW LANE, P.S. PIRBAHORE, DISTRICT PATNA. ... ... OPPOSITE PARTIES. ---- For the Petitioners : Mrs. Sudha Ambastha, Adv. For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Manoj Priyadarshi, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ---- P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ---- Rakesh Kumar,J. Heard Smt. Sudha Ambastha, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Shri Manoj Priyadarshi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 and also heard Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. 2. Four petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under 2 Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 22.4.1999 passed by Shri Ravindra Patwari, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna in Complaint Case No.1762(C) of 1998. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 452, 323 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. While the matter was pending, good sense has prevailed between the parties. In between two families, several litigations were pending. Now it has been decided to settle and withdraw all the cases pending in between the parties. The complainant i.e. opposite party no.2, in the present case, has filed affidavit to this effect. It would be better to quote paragraphs 6 and 7 of the affidavit, which was filed on 17.8.2010 : “6. That the well wishers, family members, friends and other relatives have intervened in the matter and put their genuine efforts to bring the contesting parties to the compromise so that both the members of the respective 3 families live in peace and make their progresses in life. It has been agreed that opposite party no.2 would withdraw/compromise her complaint case no.1762/98 pending before competent court of judicial magistrate, 1st class, Patna.” “7. That similarly it has also been agreed upon by the Sunita Kumari and the petitioners of this case that Sunita Kumari would withdraw/compromise her complaint case no.911/98 pending before competent court of judicial magistrate, 1st class, Patna. She has also agreed to withdraw her application dated 12/01/98 (Annexure-K) filed before department of Animal Husbandry, Bihar, Patna, on which basis departmental proceeding was initiated against Krishna Kant Kumar. It has also been agreed that frozen amount as stated hereinabove of rupees 85,000/- 4 approximately, as in 1996/97, would be released by Sunita Kumari. The said amount would be got fixed in the respective names of two daughters namely Mayuri and Saloni in equal numbers with proper security that they could only be spent towards welfare of the daughters above named.” 4. On behalf of the petitioners, an affidavit has been filed today. In paragraph-5, it has been stated that “all the aforesaid cases, the deponents want to withdraw in safe of compromise in competent court”. In view of the fact that dispute has already been settled in terms of averment made in affidavits filed on behalf of both the parties, no purpose could be served in allowing the proceeding before the learned Magistrate in Complaint Case No.1762(C) of 1998 to further proceed. 5. Accordingly, in view of agreement as indicated above between the parties, the order of cognizance dated 22.4.1999 passed in complaint case No.1762(C) of 1998 is hereby set aside. It is directed that both the parties 5 should abide by their undertaking given before this Court. It is made clear that if at subsequent stage, the petitioners retract from their undertaking given before this Court, the opposite party no.2 will be at liberty to approach this Court with a request to cancel this order. It is expected that both the parties may settle their dispute preferably within a period of two months from today. 6. With above observation, the petition stands disposed of. ( Rakesh Kuamr,J.) PATNA HIGH COURT Dated 19.8.2010 N.A.F.R./N.H.