IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Crl. Misc. Application (C-482) No. 510 of 2008 1. Imran S/o Abdul Safi R/o Gajrora Farm, Fatehpur, Haldwani, Nainital. 2. Suriya Begam W/o Abdul Safi R/o Gajrora Farm, Haldwani, Nainital. 3. Abdul Safi S/o Abdul Hai R/o Gajrora Farm, Fatehpur Haldwani, Nainital. 4. Badruddin S/o Abdul Kafi R/o Bharatpur, Kamluaganja, Haldwani, Nainital. 5. Salim S/o Mohd. Shamim R/o Gajrora Farm, Haldwani, Nainital. 6. Arshad S/o Abdul Rashid R/o Gajrora Farm, Fatehpur, Haldwani, District Nainital. 7. Mutwar Rahman S/o Lutfur Rahman R/o Isain Nagar, Lamachaur, Haldwani, Nainital. 8. Faitur Rahman S/o Lutfur Rahman R/o Isain Nagar, Lamachaur, Haldwani, Nainital. 9. Nisar S/o Iqbal R/o Line No. 12, Azadnagar, Haldwani, Nainital. ...…………. Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home Affairs Govt. of Uttarakhand at Dehradun. 2. Atul Kumar Sah Addl. District Govt. Advocate Criminal District Nainital. 3. Mohammad Harun S/o Yakub R/o Village Gujrora Fatehpur District Nainital. [ ...…………. Respondents Mr. R.S. Sammal, Advocate for the petitioner. 2 Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for respondent No. 1 / State. Mr. K.K. Tiwari, Advocate for respondent No. 3. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), the petitioners have challenged the order dated 26.04.2008, passed by Asstt. Sessions Judge / Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 146 / 2007, State Vs. Noman and another, relating to offences punishable under Section 395, 397, 506 of I.P.C., police station Haldwani, District Naintial. (This case is being disposed of in compliance of order dated 19th of December 2008, passed by the Apex court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9355 of 2008, with Criminal Misc. Petition No. 20899 of 2008). 3) Brief facts of the case are that a first information report was got lodged by respondent No. 3 Mohd. Harun, by moving an application under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C., before the Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani, on the basis of which Crime No. 5255 of 2006, relating to offences punishable under Section 395, 397, 506, 427 of I.P.C. was registered against named accused i.e. Noman and Manan (not the petitioners). After investigation a final report was submitted by the police, 3 copy of which is Annexure –3 to the petition. It appears that on said report, complainant filed a protest petition, which was treated as criminal complaint, and statement of the complainant was recorded under Section 200, and that of the witnesses, namely Kalim and Hemchand under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. None of the three has named any of the petitioners in their statements. The trial court appears to have summoned the petitioners only on the statement of P.W. 1 Harun, after the case was committed to the court of Sessions, for trial. 4) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are grand parents, maternal uncles, son- in-law of the two accused, who are facing the trial. It is further contended that it is abuse of process of law on the part of the complainant to implicate the petitioners, who were known to him and still not named either in the first information report or in the statements under Section 200 / 202 of Cr.P.C. 5) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after going through the papers on record, this Court finds it a clear case of abuse of process of law on the part of the complainant by naming the petitioners in his statement recorded before the Sessions Judge, for the first time, which is not corroborated by any other evidence on record. This Court is of the view that powers under Section 319 of 4 Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly after getting convinced that someone who has not been charge sheeted / summoned is found to have played role in commission of crime. Present case is not of that category. 6) For the reasons as discussed above, the impugned order dated 26.04.2008, passed by Asstt. Sessions Judge / Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 146 of 2007, is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the same is quashed. The petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. stands allowed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. April 12, 2010. H. Negi