IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 184 of 2005 Vishambhar and others …Petitioners Versus State and others …Respondents Dated:16-04-2010 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioners have sought the relief for quashing the entire criminal proceedings against the petitioners and setting aside the impugned summoning order dated 23.11.2002 as well as order dated 24.2.2005 passed by Additional Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, Haridwar in criminal case no. 334 of 2001, Smt. Romash Devi vs. Vishambhar and others, under Sections 323, 452,504,506 I.P.C. P.S. Kotwali, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 2- Brief facts of the case are that respondent no. 3 filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, Haridwar on 16.5.2001. On the direction of the learned Magistrate, the police lodged an F.I.R. against the petitioners under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. After completing the investigation of the case, final report was submitted by the police in the case, against which respondent no. 3 filed protest petition. The learned Magistrate vide order dated 5.7.2002 rejected the final report submitted by the police and by following the procedure of Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. summoned the petitioners for the offence under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. vide order dated 23.11.2002. Against the summoning order dated 23.11.2002, the petitioners submitted their objections and the same were also dismissed and non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioners vide order dated 24.2.2005. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have preferred the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court. 3- Heard Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for respondents no. 1 and 2 and perused the record. None has appeared on behalf of respondent no. 3. 4- The learned Magistrate has taken the cognizance in the matter after considering the entire material collected by the police during the course of investigation and no abuse of process of court would be caused to the accused petitioners, if the case proceeds before the trial court. The evidence in the case is still incomplete and hazy. This court is not supposed to embark upon an enquiry with regard to allegations levelled against the petitioners at this stage. Any judgment rendered by this Court would amount to pre-trial. It is the job of the trial judge to decide the matter on the basis of evidence to be colleted before it and then to decide the case on merits. However, I do not find any abuse of process of court and any flagrant injustice is to be caused to the petitioners at this stage, in case, if they face the trial before the trial court. There is nothing on record which may indicate that the court below by summoning the petitioners as accused has committed any manifest error which may warrant the interference of this Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 5- The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 6- Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. The interim stay order, if any, stands vacated. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP