Ashwani Kumar Singh, J.

By way of the present application preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner had initially prayed for quashing of the First Information Report vide Patna Sadar Jakkanpur P.S.Case No. 430 of 2013 dated 10.12.2013 registered under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'). However, during pendency of the writ application since the Police completed investigation of the case and submitted its report under Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna vide Police Report No. 219/14 dated 25.07.2014, pursuant to which the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna took cognisance for the offence punishable under Section 420/34 IPC and summoned the petitioner and her son-in-law Surendra Sah to face trial vide order dated 11.08.2014, the petitioner has filed an Interlocutory Application, vide I.A. No. 1316 of 2015, seeking quashing of the aforesaid police report dated 25.07.2014 and the order dated 11.08.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna.

2. The Respondent No.6, Mr. Krishna Mohan Murari (for short 'the complainant''), an 'Advocate on Record' of this court bearing AOR No.03955, had initially filed a complaint under Section 200 of the Cr.P.C. in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna vide Complaint Case No. 2851(C) of 2013. The complaint was thereafter made over to the court of jurisdictional Magistrate, who forwarded the same to the Officer-in-Charge of Jakkanpur Police Station, Patna for investigation in exercise of power conferred under sub-section (3) of Section 156 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 23.10.2013 pursuant to which the FIR of Jakkanpur P.S.Case No.430 of 2013 dated 10.12.2013 was registered under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B of the IPC against the petitioner Most. Munni Kuwar and her son-in- law Surendra Sah and investigation was taken up.

3. In the aforesaid complaint the complainant has alleged that an unmarried son of the petitioner, namely, Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Kumar Gupta died in a rail accident on 10.07.2004 at Dehrion-Sone Junction while he was travelling by a passenger train viz. Varanasi-Asansol train bearing Train No. 302 from Sasaram Railway Station to Anugrah Narain Railway Station with proper and valid journey ticket. After the death of her son, the petitioner approached the complainant on 11.09.2004 along with her well wishers to file a claim application for grant of compensation on account of death of her son. She handed over the entire Police papers relating to the death of her son and also executed an agreement with regard to payment of fee in favour of the complainant. The said agreement annexed with the complaint petition reads to the effect that the petitioner shall pay to the advocate Sri Krishna Mohan Murari at the rate of 10% and 12½ % of the decretal amount in terms of compensation for conducting the case at the stage of the lower court and at the stage of the High Court respectively. It is further stated in the complaint petition that pursuant to the aforesaid agreement dated 11.09.2004 a claim application for grant of compensation was filed on 13.09.2004 in the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench at Patna vide Case No. 0A000122/2004. After hearing the parties, the Railway Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim application vide order dated 06.02.2009 where after, a Miscellaneous Appeal was filed before the Patna High Court challenging the impugned order dated 06.02.2009, vide M.A.No.231 of 2009. The said Miscellaneous Appeal was ultimately allowed in favour of the petitioner vide order dated 09.02.2012 and the respondents were directed to pay a compensation of Rs. 4 lakhs with interest @ 6% to the petitioner from the date of filing the claim application before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna till the date of actual payment.

4. It is further stated in the complaint petition that purs