IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 535/2004 Durgesh Kumar Saxena .. Petitioner Vs. State of Uttaranchal & another ..Respondents WITH Criminal Misc. Application No. 247/2005 Kumari Vinita Rani .. Petitioner Vs. State of Uttaranchal & another ..Respondents Dated: 18-05-2010 [Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. (Oral)] List has been revised. None has appeared on behalf of the petitioners. Heard learned A.G.A. and perused the record. Both these petitions U/s 482 Cr.P.C. have been filed for quashing the proceeding of Special Sessions Trial No. 10 of 2002, State Vs. Kailash Nath and others, U/Ss 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. pending before Special Judge (Anti Corruption/Additional Sessions Judge/ II F.T.C. Nainital. Having considered the submission advanced by learned A.G.A. and perusing the documents filed before me, I am of the view that there is no flagrant injustice and abuse of process of court in this case. The evidence is still incomplete and hazy. This court while exercising the jurisdiction U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is not supposed to act as a trial Judge. The 2 averments made in the petition are the disputed question of fact, which can be assessed and judged by the trial court. I am not supposed to embark upon an enquiry with regard to the credibility of the evidence at this stage. Any judgment rendered by me would amount to premature judgment. The applicants shall have an opportunity to place the evidence in their defence before the trial court where the matter shall be finally adjudicated after considering the entire evidence. I do not find any merit in these petitions, at this stage. Accordingly, both the petitions are dismissed. The interim stay, if any, stands vacated. Let a copy of this order be placed in the file of Criminal Misc. Application No. 247/2005. ISB (B.C. Kandpal, J.)