IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 660 Of 2010 In Miscellaneous Application No. 4396 of 2010 1 Amarpal Singh S/o Late Kaviraj Arjan Singh 2. Harmeet Singh S/o Shri Amarpal Singh 3. Inderjeet Singh S/o Shri Amarpal Singh All R/o T-11, Ground Floor, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi ………………..Applicants Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through S.S.P.Dehradun 2. Jaspal Singh S/o Late kaviraj Arjan Singh R/o 25/8 E.C.Road, Dehradun ………….Opposite parties Shri Arvind Vashisth, Advocate, present for the petitioners Shri P.S.Bohara, Brief Holder, present for the State Shri R.K.S. Verma, Advocate, present for the complainant Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this petition, moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short of Cr.P.C), the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4829 of 2009 state 2 vs. Amarpal Singh and others relating to offences punishable under section 380, 506 I.P.C, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. (2) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit, counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit. (3) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and the complainants are related to each other, and belong to Ayurvedic practitioners family. There had been some dispute between them, as to the property inherited by them. In the First Information Report lodged on behalf of the complainant it is alleged that on 20th of July 2009, the accused entered in the shop of complainant, in his possession, and occupied it in the night. It is further alleged that the accused had taken away the movable property of the complainant from the shop in question, after investigation the police submitted charge sheet. (4) Learned counsel for the petitioners 3 submitted that a civil suit is already pending between the parties before the District Judge, Delhi. It is alleged that the First Information Report is subsequent to the suit filed on behalf of the petitioner Amarpal Singh against the complainant Jaspal Singh. Copy of the plaint shows that it has been prayed in the suit before the Delhi court, that receiver be appointed in respect of the property in dispute. (5) Since, it requires appreciation of evidence to come to the conclusion whether, the offence as alleged by the complainant has been made out or not. It is not desirable on the part of this court to enter into such kind of disputed fact in its jurisdiction under section 482 of Cr.P.C. It is for the trial court to examine the issue after recording the evidence. (6) Therefore, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, pending before the trial court, this petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is dismissed, with the observation that if the petitioners Amarpal Singh, Harmeet Singh 4 and Inderjeet Singh, surrender before the court concerned, their bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. It is open for the petitioners to raise the plea before trial court that the dispute between the parties is of civil nature. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.13.12.2010 N.P