IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21254 of 2008 BINOD KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 3. 8.9.2008. Mr. Tarakant Jha, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, referring to the supplementary affidavit, submits that since the parties have already entered into a compromise, a joint compromise petition has been filed which is at flag ‘A’. The learned counsel for O.P. No.2, Mr. Sameer Ranjan, does not oppose the aforesaid submission and admits that his client has entered into a compromise and having entered into the compromise all disputes and differences between them have been settled amicably. The offence whereunder cognizance has been taken are compoundable and this Court should not be a clog when the parties have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their disputes and differences. That being the position in view of the compromise having been entered into between the parties and the complainant not seeking to peruse the complaint case any further no gainful purpose would be served in letting the criminal proceeding continue. Due regard being had to the facts and the circumstances of the case, this application is allowed and the impugned order taking cognizance and the criminal proceedings in connection with Railway G.R.P.S. Case No.102 of 2002, so far as the petitioner is concerned, is hereby quashed. P.S. (Abhijit Sinha,J)