IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 790/2009 Smt. Indresh Bhati & Anr. …….Petitioners Versus State of Uttarakhand & Anr. …….Respondents November 5, 2009 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State/respondent no. 1. Mr. Rajendra Singh, Advocate for the respondent no. 2. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the cognizance order dated 18.7.2009 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Laksar, Haridwar in Criminal Case No. 500 of 2009, State v. Lalu @ Indreshpal & Ors. and chargesheet dated 13.6.2009 under Sections 363, 366, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(2) of SC/ST Act. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the papers on record. Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the materials available on record, I am of the view that a prima facie case against the petitioners under the aforesaid sections is made out from the contents of the F.I.R. This Court is not supposed to embark upon an enquiry where the entire facts are incomplete and hazy. The powers possessed by the High Court under Section 482 CrPC are very wide, but the plentitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Courts must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution. The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 2 Accordingly, the petition is dismissed in limine. However, in case, if the petitioners appear before the court concerned for obtaining the bail, the court concerned shall decide their bail applications expeditiously and without causing any unreasonable delay. (Dharam Veer, J.) 5.11.2009 PRABODH