IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.36414 of 2008 Gyasuddin Ansari S/o Manzoor Ansari, R/o Village-Baijalahan, P.S.-Gopalpur, District-Gopalganj. …….Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Mirtyunjay Mishra S/o late Harikesh Mishra. 3. Rubi Mishra Daughter of Harikesh Mishra. Both residents of Village-Baijalahan, P.S.-Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj. ……..Opposite Parteis ----------- 02 14.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner is accused in a case registered under Section 366 (A) of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel submits that the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. in the case indicates that the girl and the petitioner were friends and that the petitioner had not indulged any illegal act with the girl in question. It is also submitted that she is 16 to 17 years away and, as such, no offence is made out under Section 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code. In case, the parties compromise the matter in future and the Court comes to the conclusion that they are merely friends and that the allegation of kidnapping is incorrect. It would open to the Court to record this finding and pass appropriate orders. However, the aforesaid grounds and submissions cannot be the basis for quashing of the order of cognizance. This application is, thus, dismissed. Safik (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)