IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.2728 of 2009 DHANANJAY KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2. 16.4.2010 After having heard Shri Manojeshwar Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Mayanand Jha, learned A.P.P. for the State, I find that the order passed by the revisional Court, i.e., Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. II, Saran at Chapra in Cr. Revision No. 317 of 2006 cannot be said to be bad in law. However, the revisional court might not have used the words which were used by the Supreme Court while setting down criteria for quashing the prosecution when it was pointed out that if the allegations appear inherently improbable and patently absurd the prosecution should be quashed. It was also pointed out that if the prosecution appears stemming from an ulterior motive with a view to spitting at the accused or flowing from a malicious intention then also the prosecution shall have to be quashed. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has noticed the facts of the case and some of the features attending thereon to hold that the possibility appears bleak that such an offence could be committed in the heart of the town at a busy market place. The court upholds the reasons given by the revisional court. The petition is dismissed. Kanth ( Dharnidhar Jha, J.)