IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 757/2005 Sanjay …….Petitioner Versus State of Uttaranchal & Anr. …….Respondents October 25, 2010 Hon’ble Dharam Veer, J. Heard Mohd. Umar, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Navneet Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. MA Khan, Brief Holder for the State. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, CrPC), the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1665/2004, State v. Vinod & Ors. under Section 323, 325, 506 IPC pending in the Court of CJM, Haridwar. Facts, in brief, are that respondent no. 2 lodged an FIR against the present petitioner and three other co-accused with PS Jwalapur, District Haridwar alleging that on 5.6.2004 at about 7 am, when he was passing through Ranipur mor, the petitioner and other accused caught hold of him and committed marpit with him. They also threatened to kill the complainant. The complainant also gave preliminary medical examination report. On this, an NCR was registered under Section 323 and 506 IPC against the present petitioner and other co-accused. After investigation, chargesheet was filed against the petitioner and other co-accused under Section 323, 325 and 506 IPC, on the basis of which learned Magistrate took cognizance against the petitioner and other co-accused under the aforesaid sections and issued the summoning order dated 9.5.2005. Having considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner; perusal of the FIR and other papers available on record, I am of the view that a prima facie case against the petitioner under the aforesaid sections is made 2 out. The dispute involves factual questions which cannot be decided by this Court. The dispute can be decided only after adducing the oral and the documentary evidence by the parties before the trial court. It cannot be decided by this Court only on the basis of papers filed on the record. Even otherwise, the trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence of the complainant as well as of the accused and also on the basis of the appreciation of the evidence as per law. It is well settled that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC, 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. That is the function of trial court. If the allegations made in the FIR and the evidence collected by the Investigating Officer and the statements of witnesses recorded by the I.O. during the course of investigation are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, I am of the view that the petitioner has rightly been summoned by the trial court. The trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence adduced before it. I am of the view that in the present case there is neither any miscarriage of justice nor any abuse of process of Court. The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. Interim order dated 20.10.2005 stands vacated. (Dharam Veer, J.) 25.10.2010 PRABODH