C-482 No. 320/ 2004 Hon’ble B. C. Kandpal, J. (Restoration/Recall Application No. 146/08) Heard Sri Pooran Singh Rawat, learned counsel for the applicant on restoration/recall application and perused the affidavit filed in support thereto. Learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner has submitted before this Court that against the impugned order dated 11.12.2007 the petitioner has approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court and Special Leave Petition was dismissed on the ground that the petitioner may take the liberty to approach the High Court, therefore, with the result of the decision in the S.L.P. the petitioner has filed this restoration/recall application. As the petitioner was not present at the time when the impugned order dated 11.12.2007 was passed by me, therefore, I think that an opportunity should be provided to the petitioner to be heard. Accordingly, I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and again perused the entire material available before me. After considering the entire argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that submission advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner relates to factual aspect and it is settled law that disputed questions of fact cannot be gone into in the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The evidence is still incomplete and hazy at this stage and the matter at best can be settled by the trial Judge. Any judgment to be rendered by me at this stage would amount to pre-trial of the case which is not permissible under the provisions of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. I, therefore, do not find any substance in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. I, accordingly, do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order dated 11.12.2007. Restoration/recall application is accordingly rejected. (B.C.K., J.) 27.02.2008 SP