IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24066 of 2000 MURARI KUMAR JHA @ MURARI JHA Versus STATE OF BIHAR & Anr. ----------- 5. 16.8.2010. None appears on repeated calls. I have heard Sri Dashrath Mehta, learned A.P.P. for the State. The allegation is that without paying the price of soil to the real owners of the plot of land the petitioner was manufacturing bricks for running his brick-kiln. The prosecution has been launched under Sections 379 IPC and Section 40 of the Bihar Minor Minerals Rules,1972. The prosecution has been launched by the Assistant Mining Officer, Samastipur making the above allegations. As regards 379 of the IPC, it always comes from the real proprietor of the property as he could be the person who could be aggrieved and who could be the person to say that he could not be paid the price of the soil with dishonest intent to cause wrongful loss to him and further wrongful gain to the petitioner. As regards the application of rule 40 of the Minor Minerals Rule there is no allegation that the rule was violated in any way. Considering the above, the whole - 2 - proceeding initiated through the cognizance order passed on 6.6.2000 in Ujiarpur P.S.Case No.58 of 1999, Tr.No.1195 of 2000 by the learned S.D.J.M., Dalsingsarai Camp at Samastipur is hereby quashed. The petition is allowed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )