CRIMINAL MISCELLANIOUS No.14618 OF 2004 In the matter of an application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. SYED KAZIM ALI, Late Nawab S. Abbas Ali Saheb at & P.O. – Gauzari, P.S. – Khajekalan, Patna City, District – Patna. -----Petitioner. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Qasier Feroz Alam, S/o – Late Abdul Wahid Hassan, resident of New Karimganj, P.S. – Kotwali, District – Gaya. -------Opposite Parties. ***** For the petitioner : Mr. Anshuman, Adv. For the State : Mr. Atul Chandra, APP. ***** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHILESH CHANDRA ***** Akhilesh Chandra, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner filed I.A. Application 1832 of 2010 as well as main application. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of order dated 09.04.2003 passed by Shri P.D. Gupta, Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in Complaint Case No. 2182(C) of 2002 taking cognizance for the offences under Sections 323, 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code. As it appears after admission of the case for hearing, a direction was given to file 2 requisites for notice upon complainant opposite party no.2 after giving some adjournments even in spite of non-appearance on 06.01.2009 and 20.01.2009, ultimately, for non-compliance of peremptory order dated 20.01.2009 this application was dismissed against opposite party no.2 the complainant. It was to be taken up for hearing on 07.09.2010, matter was pointed out, learned counsel for the petitioner took time on the submission that perhaps the applicant is no more in the world, but after taking adjournments, an Interlocutory Application was filed on 13.09.2010 seeking the recall of order dismissing this application against opposite party no.2. Considering the fact that complaint case was filed in the year 2002 cognizance was taken in the year 2003 and for last 8 years, matter appears pending at very initial stage since order of cognizance brought under challenge. Considering the facts and circumstances, I find no merit in this I.A. Application, accordingly, it is dismissed. At 3 the same time, since this application stands dismissed against the complainant opposite party no. 2, it tantamount to dismissal in its entirety however, petitioner is at liberty to agitate all his points before the trial court at the time of hearing on the point of charge after getting some more materials if possible/available during cross examination of the witnesses examined before charge. With the above liberty and observations, this application stands disposed of. Patna High Court Dated : The 9th November 2010 Rajeev/N.A.F.R. (Akhilesh Chandra, J.)