IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.44100 of 2007 GURMINDAR SINGH KANG SON OF LATE SARDAR LAL SINGH KANG PRESENTLY RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.26 SECTOR-7, P.S. PANCHKULA, DIST. PANCHKULA (HARYANA) ---- PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, OLD SECRETARIAT, PATNA. 2. THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FOREST & ENVIRON- MENT, SINCHAI BHAWAN, PATNA. 3. THE CHIEF FOREST CONSERVATOR, PATNA CIRCLE, BIHAR. --- OPP. PARTIES. ----------- 03 16.02.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate no.3 for the State. The petitioner, who during the relevant time, held a high administrative position in the State of Bihar is being prosecuted under diverse Sections of Wild Life (Protection)Act, 1972, as also different provisions of the Indian Forest Act, besides Section 217, 218 and 186 of the Indian Penal Code based on a complaint lodged by the Forest Department. As per the complaint, in execution of ‘Durgawati’ reservoir project, the authorities have committed certain acts that constitute violation of the provision of law, hence the complaint. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of the present proceeding, certain developments have taken place which have been taken note by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and having regard to the agreement reached by and between the Central Government and the State 2 Government, the Supreme Court has taken a view that further penal/action or proceeding against any official of the State Government shall be unwarranted. It is contended that based on the pendente lite developments one of the co-accuseds, namely, Venkatraman Jayshankar @ V.Jayshankar moved this Court for quashing of the proceeding in Cr. Misc. No. 56413 of 2006, which has been allowed by proceeding dated 06.05.2009. Certified copy of the said order has been handed in by learned counsel for the petitioner which is kept on record marked ‘X’. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submits that although a counter affidavit has been filed in this case opposing the prayer but it is admitted position that the State has not preferred any appeal against the order dated 06.05.2009 passed in Cr. Misc. No.56413 of 2006. As agreed between the parties, the present case is also covered by the said decision of the Court. Accordingly, for the reasons assigned by this Court in the order dated 06.05.2009 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 56413 of 2006, the present application is allowed, in so far as the criminal proceeding as well as order taking cognizance dated 31.10.2006, in complaint case no. 541(2)/2006 against the petitioner, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, stands quashed. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)