IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 719 of 2010 1. Sher Ali 2. Dilshad Ahmad 3. Jamshed 4. Mohd. Irshad 5. Mursaleem Hasan 6. Mohd. Irfan All sons of Akbar Ali All R/o village Sarai, Pargana Jwalapur, Tehsil and District Haridwar ………………..Applicants Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Collector, Haridwar District Haridwar 2. Liyaqat Ali S/o Shareef Ahmad R/o village Sarai, Pargana Jwalapur, Tehsil and District Haridwar ………….Opposite parties Shri Tapan Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Lok Pal Singh, Advocate, present for the petitioners Shri M.A.Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State. Shri M.S.Tyagi, Advocate, present for the respondent no.2 Liyaqat Ali 2 Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. (2) By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short of Cr.P.C), the petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 09.07.2010, passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Haridwar under section 133 of Cr.P.C. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the proceedings and orders passed under section 133 of Cr.P.C., relate to the person against whom, the same are initiated or issued. It is further submitted that Akbar Ali against whom the impugned order was passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Haridwar, had already expired on 01.12.2009. In this connection reference is made to Annexure -7 and Annexure- 8 filed with the petition. (4) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent no.2. The factum of death of 3 Akbar Ali before the impugned order was passed is not denied in the counter affidavit. (5) In the above circumstances, the impugned order appears to have been passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, against the dead person. In view of principle of law laid down in Ram Sahai and others vs. Utama Debi and others, A.I.R. 1935, Allahabad page 79 read with Bohray Jugul Kishore vs. Emperor, A.I.R. 1928 Allahabad page 300, the impugned order is liable to be quashed as the same was against the individual, who had already died. (6) In the above circumstance, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C is allowed. Impugned order dated 09.07.2010, passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Haridwar, in case no. 01 of 2009, State vs. Akbar Ali under section 133 of Cr.P.C., is hereby quashed. Also, the impugned order dated 19.07.2010, passed by Sessions Judge, Haridwar, in criminal revision no. 339 of 2010 stands quashed. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, may pass fresh orders in the proceedings in the 4 light of the observation made above. (Urgency Application No. 01 of 2011 also stands disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.05.01.2011 N.P