IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL C 482 Criminal Misc. Application No. 915 of 2009 Subhash Goyal and others. …..…Applicants. Versus State of Uttarakhand and another. …….Respondents. Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. Mr. R.S. Sammal, learned counsel for the applicants/ petitioners. Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned AGA for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent no. 1. By way of present petition filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure impugned summoning order / cognizance order dated 10.11.2009 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar in criminal case no. 3369 of 2009 under section 498 A / 323 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act is put under challenge. The scope of Article 226 of the Constitution of India or scope of Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure is limited. While exercising powers in either of the provision, court is not supposed to enter into the question of fact or appreciation of evidence. The only thing which is required to be seen by the Court is as to whether contents of the chargesheet and material collected by the Investigating Officer make out any prima facie case or not. I have perused the statements recorded by Investigating Officer under section 161 of Code of 2 Criminal Procedure. From the perusal of statement of the complainant it is clear that on 09.06.2009 in the evening at about 7.00 p.m. complainant was beaten by petitioner no. 5 for not meeting the demand of dowry and attempted to set her at fire by pouring kerosene oil on her. From the statements made under section 161 Cr.P.C. and material collected by the Investigating Officer there is sufficient ground to take cognizance against the accused persons. In view of this learned Magistrate has not committed any jurisdictional or legal error by taking cognizance on the chargesheet submitted by the Investigating Officer. Petition is devoid of merit and as such, is dismissed summarily. (Alok Singh, J.) 01.12.2009 SKS