IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.26494 of 2009 1. SATYENDRA PRASAD, SON OF TULSI SAO 2. GOPAL PRASAD, SON OF LATE RAM PRASAD SAO 3. GUPTESHWAR PRASAD, SON OF NANHAK PRASAD 4. SHAMBHU PRASAD, SON OF GAJENDRA PRASAD 5. VISHWANATH PRASAD, SON OF RADHA PRASAD 6. BALI RAM SAO, SON OF NAGESHWAR SAO 7. BALDEO PRASAD, SON OF NAGINA SAO 8. HARIHAR PRASAD, SON OF BANSHI SAO 9. JAGDISH PRASAD, SON OF KANHAIYA LAL PRASAD 10. SHAMBHU KUMAR @ SHAMBHU PRASAD, SON OF MAHENDRA SAO 11. LAXMI PRASAD KESHARI, SON OF MADHU SAO 12. BINOD PRASAD, SON OF LATE GARBA SAO ALL ABOVE RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BAIDRABAD, POLICE STATION-ARWAL, DISTRICT ARWAL 13. RAM CHANDRA PRASAD, SON OF RAM KISHUN SAO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ARWAL, POLICE STATION & DISTRICT ARWAL 14. LAV KUSH @ LAV KUSH PRASAD, SON OF VISHWANATH PRASAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BAIDRBAD, POLICE STATION & DISTRICT ARWAL 15. BAIJNATH PRASAD, SON OF MAHESHWAR NARAYAN SAO 16. JAY PRAKASH KHATRI, SON OF VISHUNDEO KHATRI, BOTH SL. NO. 15 & 16 ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE ARWAL, POLICE STATION-ARWAL, DISTRICT-ARWAL ...PETITIONERS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ... OPP PARTY ----------- For the petitioners: Mr. Umesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Md. Kamran, APP -------- 2 28.092010 Heard the parties. The petitioners have sought quashing of the entire criminal proceeding as well as order dated 12.6.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, 4th,in Sessions Trial No.13 of 2009. 2 It has been submitted even though the occurrence had taken place on 30.03.1986, no sufficient progress has taken place in the trial and in the facts of the case since it is only a case of brick bating no offence under section 307 is made out. Considering the same, this application is allowed and the entire proceeding of S. Tr. No. 13/2009, arising out of Arwal P.S. Case No. 51 of 1986 pending before the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Jehanabad including the order dated 12.06.2009, is set aside. The application stands allowed. Ashwini ( Anjana Prakash, J.)