(Criminal) 1052 , the quashing on the basis of compromise Annexure P.4 has been sought. A glance through Annexure P.4 would reveal that Charan Singh has nowhere admitted that in fact, it was he who had suffered statement before the Court and on the basis of the same, the collusive decree was passed and no body had been put in his place as an impostor. Nay this, the FIR No.41 has been registered at the instance of Mr. Roshan Lal Chohan, PCS, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, the then Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kharar. Even on this score, the stated compromise in no matter dilute the allegations in this FIR. As recited in the FIR, “in case titled Charan Singh v. Nirmal Singh, Civil Suit No.RT-280 of 11.3.1993/ 2.3.2000, the plaintiff has sought declaration to the effect that judgment and decree in civil suit No.63 of 30.1.1990 passed on 30.4.1990 by Shri A.S. Ghuman, PCS, Sub-Judge First Class, Kharar is null and void. In this suit, the plaintiff Charan Singh has alleged that he never appeared in the Court to suffer the decree and that somebody else had falsely presented Charan Singh to secure a decree qua his land. In this case, it has been held in the judgment dated 1.2.2001 that Charan Singh- plaintiff never appeared in the Court, but somebody else falsely impersonated Charan Singh and presented power of attorney and written statement in the case titled as Nirmal Singh v. Charan Singh - Civil Suit No.63 of 20.1.1990 and subsequently, somebody else appeared in the Court to get his statement recorded on 25.4.1990 and that person also falsely impersonated Charan Singh. It has been held in the judgment dated 1.2.2001, in case titled as Charan Singh v. Nirmal Singh, Civil Suit No. RT 280 of 11.3.1993/ 2.3.2000 that a fraud has been played by defendant No.1 – Nirmal by producing two different persons on two
