IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.685 OF 2005 (U/s 482 Of Cr.P.C.) Vishnu Purohit & others …………Applicants Versus State of Uttaranchal & another …………Respondents Dated: July 9, 2010 Sri Lokendra Dobhal, Adv. for the applicants Sri Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State/respondent no.1 Sri Abhishek Verma, Adv. i/b Sri Sudhir Singh, Adv. for respondent no.3 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. This criminal application, preferred u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed for quashing the order-dated 31.05.2004 passed by Second Special Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar as well as the proceedings in Complaint No.188/2004, Smt. Preeti Vs. Vishnu Purohit & others U/s 323/452/504/506 IPC, may be quashed. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. In brief, the facts of the case are that Smt. Preeti-respondent no.2 lodged a complaint stating therein that on 16.4.2004 at about 5 PM, when she was sitting in the house of her relative, she heard sound of knocking the door, on which she came to open the door. As soon as she opened the door, the petitioners came inside her house and enquired about her husband. When the respondent no.2 asked the petitioners that her husband was not there and not to discuss anything inside the house but to talk on the road, on this the petitioner no.1 Vishnu hurled filthy abuses to her and instigated the other petitioners to beat her while the petitioner no.2-Balram pushed her aside due 2 to which she fell down on the bed whereas the petitioner no.3-Prakash committed Marpit with her with fists and kicks and hurled abuses and also threatened her by coming out of the house that if any action would be taken against them, she would be killed. It was further stated that the petitioners want to kill her husband. This incident was witnesses by Gopal, Ramesh, Babita and so many other persons collected over there. The complainant got the medical examination of her injuries and went to lodge the report but the report was not lodged and on 21.4.2004 she also sent a letter to SP Haridwar, however no action was taken, hence she filed the instant complaint. In the court below, the complainant was examined u/s 200 Cr.P.C. while PW1 Babita and PW2 Gopal were examined u/s 202 Cr.P.C. Besides the oral evidence, in the documentary evidence, copy of application dated 19.4.2004, medical certificate dated 17.4.2004, memo of medicines dated 21.4.2004, postal receipt and list of witnesses were produced. On perusing the entire facts and circumstances of the case, learned Second Special Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar vide order dated 31.5.2004 took cognizance and summoned the petitioners u/s 323/ 452/504/506 IPC. Assailing that order dated, the petitioners have filed the instant petition. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that no offence is made out against them and the petitioners have been wrongly summoned by the court below. I do not find any force in this argument for the reason that on a perusal of the complaint filed by the complainant, the statements of the complainant recorded u/s 200 Cr.P.C. as well as the statements of the witnesses, namely, Babita and Gopal, offences punishable 323/ 452/504/506 IPC, are prima facie made out against the petitioners on the basis of the above-said discussion and 3 the trial court has accordingly rightly summoned the petitioners to face trial. Even otherwise, the trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence of the complainant as well as of the accused and also on the basis of the appreciation of the evidence as per law. It is well settled that while exercising jurisdiction under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon the enquiry as to whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it accusation would not be sustained. That is the function of the trial court. If the allegations made in the complaint as well as in the statements recorded of complainant u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and the statements of witnesses recorded u/s 202 Cr.P.C., as well as the documentary evidence are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, I am of the view that the petitioners have rightly been summoned by the trial court. The trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence adduced before it. I am of the view that in the present case there is neither any miscarriage of justice nor any abuse of process of court. For the reasons recorded above, there is no force in the application. The application C482 is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed. Interim order dated 06.10.2005 is vacated. (Dharam Veer, J.) July 9, 2010 Rdang