IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Crl. Misc. Application (C-482) No. 758 of 2006 Ja gdish Singh and two others ...…………. Petitioners Versus State of Uttaranchal & four others. ...…………. Respondents Mr. K.K. Shah, Advocate, present for the petitioners. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for State. Mr. Ashwani Negi, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. M.C. Pande, Advocate, present for respondents No. 2 and 3. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard. 2) By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No. 3214 of 2004, Harjeet Singh Vs. Bacchan Singh and others, relating to offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C., pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) / Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2 3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned criminal complaint case is filed against the officers of Allahabad bank by respondents No. 2 to 5, against whom recovery proceedings were drawn in respect of loan taken from the bank. It is pleaded that it is abuse of process of law on the part of the complainants’ to implicate the petitioners in a criminal complaint case to pressurize them in respect of recovery made by the bank against the debtors and guarantors. 4) No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents No. 2 to 5 to controvert the averments made in the petition filed on behalf of the petitioners, since 2006. In the circumstances, the averments made by the petitioners cannot be disbelieved by this court. Respondents No. 2 to 5 were served personally with the notices issued by this court in the year 2006. 5) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for State and learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3, this court finds that impugned proceedings of the criminal complaint filed against the bank officers is nothing but abuse of process of law. 6) Therefore, the petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is allowed. The proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case No. 3214 of 2004, Harjeet Singh and 3 another Vs. Bacchan Singh and others, relating to offences punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of I.P.C, police station Rudrapur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) / Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. July 08, 2011. H. Negi 4