IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 954 of 2009 1. Daya Shankar Srivaastava, S/o Late Shri Ram Gulam Lal, R/o Vidya Vihar Colony, Police Station Raipur District Dehradun 2. Smt. Premlata W/o Daya Shankar Srivaastava, R/o Vidya Vihar Colony, Police Station Raipur District Dehradun 3. Rozar Philip W/o Shri Jeorge Philip R/o 14, Old Survery Road, Police Station Dalanwala District Dehradun. …Petitioners. Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary, Home, Uttarakhand, Dehradun. 2. Sati Ram @ Sant Ram S/o Late Shri Bachchu Lal, R/o Purvi Patel Nagar, Near Ganda Nala District Dehradun. ……….Respondents. Shri Pawan Mishra, Advocate, for the petitioners. Shri Prabhakar Joshi, Brief Holder for State (respondent No. 1). Sri Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate for the respondent No. 2. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of criminal case No. 1464 of 2009, State Vs. Rozar Philip and others relating to offences punishable under Sections 420,467,468 and 471 I.P.C. pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IInd, Dehradun. 3. The allegations against the accused are that petitioner no.1 Daya Shankar Srivastava got the power of attorney executed through Kamaljeet @ Smt. Kamala Devi (not accused in the charge sheet) and on its basis, he further executed power of attorney in favour of petitioner no.2 Smt. Prem Lata, who transferred the land, allegedly belonging to the complainant (respondent no.2) to petitioner no.3 (Rozar Phillip). 4. The case of the complainant is that he is owner of the land on the basis of will executed by Smt. Kamala Devi in his favour. 5. It appears that Original Suit No.201/2009 was instituted by respondent no.2 Smt. Premlata against the complainant Sati Ram @ Sant Ram (present respondent no.2) in respect of the property in question. Annexure No.2 to the supplementary affidavit to the present writ petition shows that on 16.01.2010 the said suit was dismissed in terms of compromise 22 A filed before trial court (Ist Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Div.), Dehradun). The parties to the litigation have filed compromise application No.1316 of 2009 before this Court alongwith affidavit of Sati Ram @ Sant Ram (respondent no.2). The complainant has stated that since he has got his property back, he is not interested to prosecute the petitioners. 6. In view of the principle of law laid down in Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. (2008) 9 SCC Page 677, the proceedings of impugned criminal case are liable to be quashed in view of the fact the dispute is actually of civil nature and has also been compounded by the parties and complainant has received back his property. 7. For the reasons as discussed above, petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. Proceedings of criminal case No. 1464 of 2009, State Vs. Rozar Phillip and others relating to offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate IInd, Dehradun, are hereby quashed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt:11.3.2010 JKJ