IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.707 OF 2009 (U/S 482 Cr.P.C.) Anupam Gupta ……… Applicant Versus Smt. Arti Chandnani ……… Respondent Dated: October 23, 2009 Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate for the applicant None for the respondent HON. DHARAM VEER, J. This application moved u/s 482 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.) is directed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 10.8.2009 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee, District Haridwar in criminal complaint case no.2595/2009, Smt. Aarti Chandani Vs. Anupam Gupta. It is further prayed to stay the proceeding of aforesaid complaint case during the pendency of this application. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the material available on record. Brief facts of the case are that respondent-Smt. Arti Chandnani filed a complaint in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee with the averments that in July, 2008 she gave Rs.2,40,000/- to the applicant for purchasing two second hand cars from the applicant. Same amount was received by the applicant but thereafter he refused to give the car. When the respondent asked for her money then the applicant told her that he has invested her money in his business. He gave 12 receipts of Rs.20,000/- each as security to the respondent and told that in six months he will pay her money. But even after six months, the applicant did not return her money. Thereafter on 15.6.2009, a notice was sent to the applicant through her 2 counsel but the same remained futile. Thereafter a complaint case was registered as Case No.2595/2009 against the applicant. The complainant in support of her case examined herself u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and also got produced Jagdeep Chandnani and Vijay Singh u/s 202 Cr.P.C. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and appreciating the material on record, learned Judicial Magistrate, Roorkee vide his order dated 10.8.2009 took the cognizance against the applicant u/s 406 IPC and directed him to appear before the court to face the trial. Against that order, the applicant has preferred this application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court. It is well settled that while exercising jurisdiction u/s 482 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court would not ordinarily embark upon the enquiry as to whether the evidence in question is reliable or not or whether on a reasonable appreciation of it accusation would not be sustained. The trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence of the complainant as well as of the applicant and also on the basis of the appreciation of the evidence as per law. From a perusal of the contents of the complaint and other documents, prima facie it reveals that the offence punishable u/s 406 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. For the reasons recorded above, there is no force in this application. The C482 application is devoid of merits and is dismissed in limine. (Dharam Veer, J.) 23.10 2009 RG