IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.18877 of 2010 AGAM LAL SHARMA S/O LATE MAHESH LAL SHARMA R/O VILLAGE- BALUGANJ, P.S. BALRAMPUR, DISTRICT- KATIHAR ……………… Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. KISHNU SHARMA S/O LATE ANUP LAL SHARMA R/O VILLAGE- BALUGANJ, P.S.- BALRAMPUR ……………….Opposite Parties ----------- 2. 04.02.2011 Heard the parties. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 10.02.2009 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, (F.T.C.-I, Katihar) in Cr. Revision No. 88/2008, T.R. No. 1/2009, by which he has confirmed the order dated 9.5.2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Katihar in C.A. No. 1612/2005. The complicity of the petitioner arose because in the petition of the complaint one Agam Lal Sharma was mentioned as accused no. 1 who the petitioner claimed was his brother where as the petitioner was Agam Lal Sharma and not involved in the present case. However, on going through the solemn affirmation, I find that the complainant has mentioned Agham Lal Sharma as one of the accused. When the petitioner had moved this court for the same reason this court directed him to move again before the court below for clarification upon which the complainant was asked but unfortunately the matter remained undecided and Trial Court concluded that it could only be resolved during Trial which is perfectly convert view. The application is disposed off with a direction to the Judicial Magistrate to proceed with the complaint and conclude the same within the period of six months from the receipt of this order. At the stage when the complainant is examined he shall be asked about the identity of the accused and clear the confusion. With these observations the application is disposed off. Fahad. ( Anjana Prakash, J. )