IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.21164 of 2007 PRASHANT PRAKASH @ RINKU KUMAR, S/o-Om Prakash Mahto, resident of Mohalla-Paharpura, P.S.-Bihar, District-Nalanda. …….Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Arjun Prasad son of Lakshaman Mahto, resident of Mohalla- Paharpura, P.S.-Bihar, District-Nalanda. ……..Opposite Parties. ----------- 04. 15.05.2009 Bihar P.S. Case No. 163 of 2005 came to be filed by the informant who is an ex-army man when the petitioner and his family members have conducted themselves in a manner for which substantive offence under the I.P.C. was made out. It is stated that after investigation police submitted charge-sheet but only under Sections 323 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code but cognizance has been taken under other substantive offences like Sections 341, 384, 386 of the Indian Penal Code. Besides other submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have realized the futility of litigation and would like to bring about peace in the neighborhood and therefore, a compromise petition has been filed in the Court below which has been kept on record as would be apparent from the order dated 03.07.2008. Based on the said compromise petition, it is stated that no purpose would be served to the prosecution of the petitioner since it will be detrimental to the peace and harmony in the locality. 2 In absence of Opposite Party No. 2 before this Court, this Court is not inclined to pass an order quashing the proceedings straightaway but is willing to direct the petitioner to appear before the Court below and the Court below on being satisfied with the bona fide of the compromise petition, may consider, dropping the proceedings in the given circumstance in view of the opinion expressed by the Court below in the earlier order. With these observations and directions, the application stands disposed of. Shageer (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)