IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Petition No. 11 of 2009 Naseem S/o Habeeb Resident of Village Naseerpur Kalan, P.S. Pathari, District Haridwar. ...…………. Petitioner [ Versus 1. State of Uttarakand through Secretary Home, Dehradun. 2. Saheed S/o Kallu R/o Village Dhanpura, P.S. Pathari, Distt. Haridwar. ...…………. Respondents Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Govt. Advocate for the State. Mr. Sanjeev Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2 (complainant). Hon. Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner has sought direction quashing the charge sheet and proceedings arisen out of Crime No. 141 of 2007, relating to offences punishable under Section 406, 420, 506 of I.P.C., registered with police station Pathari, District Haridwar, pending in the court of Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar (Criminal Case No. 1393 of 2008, State Vs. Naseem). 2 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the grievance of the complainant (respondent No. 2) was that the petitioner (accused) did not execute the sale deed as agreed between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner (accused) submitted that sale deed has already been executed during investigation in favour of the complainant (respondent No. 2). Attention of this Court is drawn to joint affidavit signed by the parties on 11.12.2007 (copy of which is Annexure –5 to the petition). Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 admitted that the parties have already entered into compromise and complainant is no more interested to prosecute the matter further. Apart from this, a joint compromise has been filed before this Court with joint affidavit of the parties in support of Misc. Application No. 15 of 2009. 4) In view of the principle of law laid down in Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others; 2008 (7) Supreme 663, this Court is of the opinion that in view of the compromise entered between the parties, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. 5) Therefore, the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1393 of 2008; State Vs. Naseem, relating to offences punishable under Section 406, 420, 506 of I.P.C., police station Pathari, District Haridwar, pending 3 in the court of Ist Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, are hereby quashed. (Misc. Application No. 15 of 2009 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. January 07, 2009. H.Negi