IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Crl. Misc. Application (C482) No. 846 of 2005 1. Mahendra 2. Rajendra 3. Sadhu Ram All S/o late Shri Buddhu R/o Village Bahaderpur Khadar P.S. Laksar, Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar. 4. Dinesh S/o Sri Sher Singh R/o Village Niranjanpur, P.S. Laksar, Tehsir Laksar, Distt. Haridwar. 5. Briham Singh S/o Inchharam 6. Rajendra Singh s/o Anantram 7. Suresh Pal S/o Udai Singh 8. Tejpal Singh S/o Shobharam All 5 to 8 R/o Village Bahaderpur Khadar P.S. Laksar, Tehsil Laksar, Distt. Haridwar. ………… Petitioners Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal through Superintendent of Police Haridwar, District Haridwar. 2. Civil Judge (J.D.) / Judicial Magistrate Laksar, District Haridwar. 3. Harprasad S/o late Sri Madanlal R/o Village Laksar, P.S. Laksar Tehsil Laksar, District Haridwar. ………… Respondents Mr. M.S. Tyagi, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate for respondent No. 1 / State. 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 Case No. 399 of 2005, State Vs. Mahendra and others, relating to offences punishable under Section 379, 504, 506 of I.P.C., police station Laksar, District Haridwar, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) / Judicial Magistrate, Laksar. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the impugned criminal proceedings have been initiated by the complainant Harprasad only to pressurize the petitioners in the civil litigation pending between the parties, in connection with the property in dispute. It is pleaded on behalf of the petitioners that it is hard to believe that the incident has taken place in the manner stated in the first information report that the petitioners had taken away ‘CHARRI’ (green cattle feed) from the field, allegedly owned by the complainant. 4) Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State, this Court finds that the disputes raised in the petition are factual in nature, which cannot be decided by this Court. It is for the trial court to see, after recording the evidence, as to whether the petitioners have actually taken away the ‘CHARRI’ (green cattle feed), or insulted, or criminally intimidated the complainant, or not. 5) Therefore, for the reasons as discussed above, this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the court concerned, in Criminal Case No. 399 of 2005, State Vs. Mahendra and others, their bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. May 12, 2010. H. Negi