IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Second Criminal Misc. Application No.1117 of 2010 Vinay Pant ………..Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand and another …….Respondents Shri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri S.S. Adhikari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/ respondent no.1. Dated: 24th November, 2010 Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is a Second Criminal Misc. application has been filed by the applicant for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case no.1713 of 2003 (Case Crime No.7 of 2003) “State Vs. Krishna Devi” under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C., Police Station Rishikesh, District Dehradun. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent no.2, lodged FIR with P.S. Rishikesh on 05.01.2003, with the averments that the property in dispute was registered in his name by his maternal grandmother. But, Smt. Krishna Devi (who is the daughter of his mother’s sister) and her husband i.e. Sardar Kripal Singh told his maternal grandfather that they have to build a new house and requested him to accommodate them and their belongings in his house till the completion of their new building. But later on they got prepared a forged Will of his maternal grandmother and refused to vacate the premises. The complainant 2 filed a civil suit at Dehradun, wherein they could not prove their case and on 19.04.2002, they gave in writing before the Court that they had handed over the possession of the property in dispute to the complainant, but in the meantime they had already sold the said property to the applicant, who forcibly took over the possession of the said property on 26.04.2002, by breaking open the locks. They had assured the complainant that they would give the money in lieu of the said property but subsequently refused to give him either property or the money. Therefore, the respondent no.2 lodged FIR against co-accused persons namely Smt. Krishna Devi and her husband Sardar Kripal Singh as well as the applicant. On the basis of this FIR, a case was registered against the applicant and other co-accused persons under Section 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. After the investigation, the Investigation Officer submitted a charge sheet against the applicant as well as the co-accused persons on the basis of which learned Special Judicial Magistrate has taken the cognizance of the offence against the applicant as well as the co- accused persons vide order dated 06.10.2003. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that after the dismissal of the earlier Criminal Misc. application, the applicant entered into a compromise with the respondent no.2 (first informant), in which it was settled between the parties that respondent no.2 does not want any legal action to be taken against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that Original Suit filed by the respondent no.2, was decreed in favour of the respondent no.2, and in pursuance of that decree, the applicant has already got the sale deed executed in favour of the respondent no.2. He further submitted that the applicant was not at all involved in the crime, as he was a bonafide purchaser and anything if at all done, that was done by the co-accused persons, who sold the said property. 5. On the other hand, Shri S.S. Adhikari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/ respondent no.1 submitted that earlier Criminal Misc. application filed by the applicant was decided on merit and, therefore, the Second Criminal Misc. application cannot be and should not be entertained, as the facts are identical to the earlier Criminal Misc. application. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and also by perusing the judgment passed by this Court in earlier Criminal Misc. application, this Court is not inclined to pass any order in this Criminal Misc. application. The Second Criminal Misc. application is dismissed. However, it is provided that, in case Bail Application is moved by the applicant before the learned Trial Court, the same shall be decided expeditiously. 7. Stay application (CRMA No.1319 of 2010) also stands disposed of. (V.K. Bist, J.) Arpan 24.11.2010