IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Crl. Misc. Application (C-482) No. 430 of 2010 Mohd. Tazim S/o Hazi Bundu Khan R/o Indira Nagar, Haldwani, D istrict Nainital. ...…………. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home Affairs, Dehradun. 2. Kotwali Haldwani, District Nainital. 3. Nagar Palika Parishad, Haldwani, District Nainital. 4. Executive Officer Nagar Palika Parishad, Haldwani, District Nainital. ...…………. Respondents Mr. T.A. Khan, Advocate, present for the petitioner. Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder, present for the State. Mr. Ashish Joshi, Advocate, present for respondent No. 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 (for short Cr.P.C.), the petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4018 of 2009, State Vs. Mohd. Tazim, relating to offences punishable under 2 Section 447, 120-B, 189 of I.P.C., pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner pleaded that the Executive Officer of the Nagar Palika Parishad, Haldwani, namely Mr. K.C. Pandey whose statement is said to have recorded by the Investigating Officer on 22.06.2009, had died on 21.06.2009. It is also pleaded that the petitioner’s possession is more than three years old, and as such, cognizance cannot be taken after three years in respect of the alleged offence. 4) Whether, Mr. K.C. Pandey died on 21.06.2009, and whether the statement is actually recorded on 22.06.2009, are questions of fact. Similarly, whether the occupation of the petitioner is more than three years, and he is not liable to criminal action apart from the civil proceedings under U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, are also required to be seen by the trial court, as this court cannot examine factual dispute as to from which date the petitioner (accused) is in occupation of the public land. 5) In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is dismissed with the observation that if Mohd. Tazim surrenders before 3 the trial court, and moves application for bail, his bail shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. (Stay Application No. 476 of 2010; Urgency Application No. 2195 of 2011 and Urgency Application No. 2253 of 2011 also stand disposed of). (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. June 17, 2011. H. Negi