IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9872 of 2005 SAMEER KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 14 30.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner challenges order dated 9.2.2005 passed by the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sadar, Sitamarhi in Belsand P.S. Case No. 58 of 2003, G.R. 1030 of 2003, whereby he has rejected the petition filed by the petitioner for his discharge on the ground that the compromise arrived at by the informant was not with all the accused. I see no illegality in the impugned order and the learned Magistrate has rightly rejected the petition for discharge since the compromise has not been arrived between all the parties of litigation. However, if there has really been compromise between the parties the informant should file a fresh compromise petition showing a compromise with all the persons named as accused in the case and in the event of such compromise petition being filed the Court below will proceed in accordance with law. Accordingly with the aforesaid observations this application is dismissed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)