IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 41/2005 Galib Hassan .. Petitioner. Versus State of Uttaranchal & others .. Respondents. Mr.Nagesh Aggrawal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned AGA for respondents 1 to 3. None appeared for respondent No.4. Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J.(Oral) Dated: 15-04-2010 By way of this petition, U/S 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order dated 19-10-2004, passed Judicial Magistrate Roorkee, in case No. 1704/2004, State Vs. Galib Hassan U/Ss 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. He also prayed for quashing of the proceeding of the aforesaid criminal case. The facts of the case, in short, are that respondent No.4, lodged a F.I.R. against the applicant alleging therein that he purchased some land from the accused in the year 1995 and the said land had already been given to some other by the accused in the year 1993 and thereby fraud was played with the complainant. The police investigated the matter and submitted charge sheet against accused/applicant Galib Hassan and one another U/Ss 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. On receipt of charge sheet the learned Judicial Magistrate, vide impugned order dated 19.10.2004, took cognizance in the matter and summoned them to face the trial U/Ss 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. Hence this petition. 2 I have heard Sri Nagesh Aggarwal, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the dispute in the instant case is purely of civil nature and no criminal offence is made out against the applicant. The proceedings of criminal case against the applicant are abuse of process of court, hence liable to be quashed. Learned AGA has made the rival contention that bare perusal of the F.I.R. indicates that there is an element of the criminal offence against the petitioners, hence merely on the basis that the matter relates to the civil nature, the criminal proceeding cannot be stopped. Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any merit in this petition. The learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the applicant and one another after perusing the case diary and the charge sheet submitted by the police in the matter. The learned Magistrate was satisfied that prima facie case is made out against the accused persons. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned summoning order. It is also noted here that in proceedings U/S 482 Cr.P.C. this court is not supposed to act as a trial judge. I am not supposed to embark upon an enquiry at this stage, specially under the circumstances when the evidence is still incomplete and hazy. In view of above discussion, the petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 3 Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. The interim stay order, if any, stands vacated. ISB (B.C. Kandpal, J.)