Court No. 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 266 of 2004 Chandra Shekhar s/o Sri Gusain Ram, R/o Village Kohli Patti Tehsil Katyoor, Post Office Bhatoli, Tehsil and District Bageshwar At present 2x0/46 Constable Chandra Shekhar Kotwali District Almora …Applicant Vs. 1- State of Uttaranchal, through Home, Secretary, Uttaranchal, Dehradun. 2- Smt. Kamla Devi w/o Sri Gusain Ram, R/o Village Kholi Patti Tehsil Katyoor, Post Office Bhatoli, Tehsil and District Bageshwar … Respondents Sri Ramesh Tampta, Advocate, for the applicant Learned A.G.A. for respondent no.1. Dated: February 14, 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought the relief for setting aside the order dated 6.11.2003 passed by Special Magistrate, Bageshwar in Criminal Case No. 61/2003 and order dated 29.3.2004 passed by District & Sessions Judge, Bageshwar in Criminal Revision No. 4/2003. The facts giving rise to this petition in short are that respondent no. 2 filed a complaint under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for maintenance against the petitioner before the court of Special Magistrate, Bageshwar. The learned Magistrate vide order dated 6.11.2003 awarded the amount of Rs. 1300/- in favour of respondent no. 2. Being aggrieved, the petitioner preferred revision before the Sessions Judge and the same has been dismissed by the Sessions Judge order dated 29.3.2004. Feeling aggrieved by aforesaid both the impugned orders, the petitioner filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. before this Court. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. After going through the record as well as the submissions raised by learned counsel for the parties, I find no abuse of process of court in the instant case. The points raised in the petition are disputed questions of facts and the same can be judged after the parties lead the evidence. The disputed questions of facts cannot be judged by me at this stage, where the evidence is still and hazy and furthermore the petitioner shall have full opportunity to place his defence before the trial court. I do not find any illegality and impropriety in the impugned orders passed by both the courts below. Therefore, no interference is required by this Court in the criminal proceedings going on against the petitioner/accused. The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Stay order, if any, stands vacated. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP