IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 617 of 2004 1. Diwan Singh S/o Shri Bad Ram Singh 2. Jaipal Singh S/o Shri Mohar Singh Both residents of Village Koti Kanasar Tehsil Chakrata, District Dehradun. …………..…Petitioners. Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. Tara Singh Chauhan Forest Guard River Forest Range Chakrata, District Dehradun. ……….Respondents. Shri Ramji Srivastava, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for respondent/State. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have sought quashing of proceedings of criminal case No. 1076 of 2004, Divisional Forest Officer Vs. Veeru and others, punishable under Sections 26,41, read with Section 42 and 51 of Indian Forest Act, 1927, pending in the court of Special Judicial Magistrate II, Dehradun. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. Brief facts of the case are that in the intervening night of 26.08.2004 and 27.08.2004, around midnight, when the Forest Officials intercepted vehicle registration No. UA 07 5787, and checked it, they found that 61 sleepers of Devdar tree, were being transported by concealing 2 the same with 21 empty apple cases, on Kalsi, Chakrota Road. On finding that illegally the forest produce is being transported, the Forest Officials arrested two persons namely Veeru and Sabbal Singh at the spot, while other two Diwan Singh and Jaipal (present petitioners) succeeded in fleeing from the place of incident. A memorandum appears to have been prepared by the forest officials and a report was prepared whereafter complaint is filed for their prosecution in the court of concerned Judicial Magistrate. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners were admittedly not arrested on the spot. It is further pleaded that they are not involved in the crime. It is further contended, merely for the reason that the arrested two accused Veeru and Sabbal Singh, disclosed names of the petitioners as the persons, who asked them to transport the forest produce, does not make them liable to the criminal prosecution in respect of the offence, alleged in the criminal complaint. I have gone through the report of the forest officials and also the statement of the accused Veeru and Sabbal Singh, annexed with the petition. 5. Whether the petitioners have their complicity in the crime or not, if so, to what extent, can be examined by the trial court, after recording evidence. Merely on the assertion of the petitioners that they are innocent, this Court cannot hold so 3 at this stage in the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 6. In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that it is not a fit case to interfere with the trial of the case. 7. Therefore, the petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed with the observation that if the petitioners-Diwan Singh and Jaipal Singh, surrender before the court concerned, their bail applications shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt:16.03.2010 Sweta