RAMESH KUMAR SINGH MURLI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 22.4.2010, on repeated calls, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. However, the case was adjourned for a day. It was made clear that if on the next date no one appears on behalf the petitioner, the case shall be decided on the basis of materials available on the record of this case. It was also noticed that in the present case interim order of stay is continuing since 8.9.1999. Today, again when the case was called out none has appeared on behalf of the petitioner either to press this petition or to make a prayer for adjournment.

(2.) It appears that after obtaining the order of stay, the petitioner has lost interest in the present case and due to that reason none has come forward to press this petition.

(3.) The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of the order dated 7.6.1999 passed by Sri Bijay Kant Mishra, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in Gardanibagh (Sachivalaya) P.S. Case No.261 of 1998/Tr. No.534 of 1999. By the said order the learned Magistrate has rejected the discharge petition filed on behalf of the petitioner.