IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Compounding Application no. 1075 of 2011 In Criminal Misc. Application No. 697 of 2009 Narendra Kumar Sharma. ………. Applicant. Versus State of Uttaranchal and another. ………. Respondents. Present : Mr. B.S. Adhikari, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. P.S. Bohara, Brief Holder for the State. Mr. K.S. Verma, Advocate for respondent no. 2. Hon’ble Servesh Kumar Gupta, J. 1. By way of this criminal misc. application, prayer has been made to quash the proceedings of criminal case no. 2597 of 2009 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee and order of cognizance dated 06.08.2009 passed therein. 2. The background facts are that one of the accused Ravindra impersonated himself as Moti Ram and executed a sale deed of a land owned by Moti Ram to someone. In that sale deed Narendra Kumar Sharma (present petitioner) and Devanand another accused, were witness. 3. On lodging the FIR, investigation was made which resulted into submission of a chargesheet against the accused Ravindra, Devanand and Narendra Kumar Sharma for the offences under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. The case was registered and the impugned cognizance order was passed thereupon. Two accused persons namely Ravindra and Devanand filed a separate criminal misc. application no. 803 of 2011 seeking to quash the chargesheet and order of cognizance while Narendra Kumar Sharma (present petitioner) has filed 2 this separate petition (criminal misc. application no. 697 of 2009. 4. During the pendency of the petition, parties have entered into a compromise and land of Moti Ram has been transferred back to him, which he admits before this Court too. The criminal misc. application no. 803 of 2011 was disposed of on the basis of compromise deed with the strength of the law laid down in Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2008) 9 SCC 677. This Court quashed the chargesheet and order of cognizance against accused Ravindra and Devanand. 5. While taking up this petition for hearing, similar compounding application no. 1075 of 2011 has been filed along with compounding deed signed by both the parties, who are present in front of the Court and identified by their respective counsel. So in view of the circumstances, aforementioned and the law laid down in the case of Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2008) 9 SCC 677 this compounding application is accepted and allowed by this Court. 6. Criminal Misc. Application No. 697 of 2009 is allowed with a result, the impugned chargesheet in criminal case no. 2597 of 2009 and impugned order of cognizance dated 06.08.2009 passed thereupon are hereby quashed. (Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.) 14.09.2011 SKS