IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 761/2005 Naveen Chandra …….Petitioner Versus State of Uttaranchal & Anr. …….Respondents August 5, 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State and Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, Advocate for the respondent no. 2. This petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC) has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1182/2005, State v. Naveen Chandra under Section 279, 337, 338, 304-A IPC pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. Facts, in brief, are that on 18.10.2004 at about 2.30 pm, when Gopal Sheel was standing beside the road in front of FCI, a Marshal vehicle bearing registration no. UP-04-4243 came rashly and negligently and dashed Gopal Sheel, due to which he sustained severe injuries. The deceased was admitted in Jawahar Lal Nehru hospital in semi conscious state, from where he was referred to Sushila Tiwari Hospital, Haldwani and thereafter he was referred to Keshlata Hsopital, Bareilly. This incident was witnessed by the respondent no. 2 Sushant Rai as well as Ranjeet Tiwari and Arun Das who were sitting in a nearby tea stall. Thereafter respondent no. 2 Sushant Rai lodged an FIR with PS Rudrapur on 19.10.2004 with these averments. On the basis of this FIR, a case was registered against the petitioner under Section 279, 337, 338 IPC. Subsequently injured Gopal Sheel died. After the investigation, the I.O. submitted a chargesheet against the petitioner under Section 279, 337, 338, 304-A IPC. Hence, this petition. Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued that in the FIR the registration number of the vehicle has been mentioned as UP-04-4243 and the model was Marshal Car, whereas the model of the vehicle of whose the petitioner was driver is Mahindra Bulero and its registration no. is UA-04-4243 and, therefore, he submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. On the contrary, learned Addl. GA for the State argued that after the investigation, the registration of the vehicle has been found to be UA-04-4242 and the petitioner was the driver of the said vehicle and during the course of investigation, the witnesses have supported this version of the prosecution and after the investigation, the chargesheet against the petitioner has also been filed. He further submitted that by mistake, the registration number of the vehicle in question was written as UP-04-4243 in the FIR. Hence, the model and registration no. of the vehicle in question is a disputed and factual question, which cannot be decided by this Court at this stage merely on the basis of the papers filed on the record. From the perusal of the contents of FIR and statements of the witnesses recorded under Section 161 CrPC and other evidence collected by the I.O., a prima facie case is made out against the petitioner under the aforesaid sections. The dispute can be decided only after adducing the oral and the documentary evidence by the parties before the trial court. It cannot be decided by this Court only on the basis of papers filed on the record. Even otherwise, the trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence of the complainant as well as of the accused and also on the basis of the appreciation of the evidence as per law. If the allegations made in the FIR and the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer and the statements of witnesses recorded by the I.O. during the course of investigation are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, I am of the view that the petitioner has rightly been chargesheeted. The trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence adduced before it. I am of the view that in the present case there 2 is neither any miscarriage of justice nor any abuse of process of Court. The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the petition is hereby dismissed. Interim order dated 1.3.2006 stands vacated. (Dharam Veer, J.) 5.8.2010 PRABODH 3