Lloyds Finance Limited vs The State of Bihar and Another

Syed Md. Mahfooz Alam, J.—Heard Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Senior Advocate of the petitioners as well as Mr. Anand K. Ojha, learned Advocate of the opposite party No. 2, Mohit Kumar Sah. The learned Advocate of the opposite party No. 2 submits that opposite party No. 2, Mohit Kumar Sah, has already received payment of the bond and now there is nothing due against the petitioners towards principal amount.

The learned Advocate of the petitioners submitted that under similar circumstances, the orders of cognizance in other cases have already been quashed by this Court after payment of the dues. In support of his argument, learned Advocate of the petitioners has produced various orders of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 35165/ 2004, 35135/2004 and 12920/2004.

The learned Advocate of the opposite party No. 2 submitted that he has got no objection if this criminal miscellaneous application is disposed of with observation that any further payment shall be governed by the final decision of the Bombay High Court as several cases of similar nature are pending before the Bombay High Court. Considering the submissions of both sides, this application for quashing is hereby allowed and the prosecution of the petitioners launched in Complaint Case No. 972(C) of 2005 pending in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,'' Patna is hereby quashed with observation that any further payment shall be governed by the final decision of the Bombay High Court in similar cases.