IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.708 OF 2005 (U/s 482 Of Cr.P.C.) Prabhakar Sharma …………Applicant Versus State of Uttaranchal & others …………Respondents Dated: July 16, 2010 Sri Manish Arora, Adv. for the applicant Sri Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State/respondent nos.1 & 2 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. This criminal application, preferred u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed for quashing the summoning order-dated 18.5.2005 passed by CJM, Haridwar and also to quash the proceedings of the Case No.1800/2005, State Vs. Dinesh & others, U/s 452/323/ 504/506 IPC and 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. In brief, the facts of the case are that an application was preferred by the respondent no.3-Babul Singh before the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Commission, Uttaranchal, Dehradun stating therein that he is a member of scheduled caste and he does the work of construction of buildings. As per the agreement dated 27.1.2004 entered between the complainant and the petitioner-Prabhakar Sharma and co-accused Dinesh Kumar Sharma, he took the contract of constructing the building at Haridwar belonging to the petitioner and co- accused. Out of that work, an amount of Rs.2,24,840/- was due against the petitioner and co-accused and 2 whenever he demanded the money from the accused persons, they made him run away on the one pretext or another. On 3.8.2004 at about 8 AM when the complainant was sitting in his house, then the petitioner along with co-accused and other persons entered inside his house with intention to kill him. As soon as the complainant asked them to sit, on that the co-accused Dinesh Sharma became furious and started hurling filthy abuses and thereafter he started beating him with legs, fists and kicks. Soon thereafter, the petitioner brought an iron rod from his car and beaten him with that rod due to which he sustained serious injuries. Thereafter, the accused persons brought him outside while dragging and by threatening him to his life, hurled filthy abuses and also uttered caste indicated words. On the noise raised by the complainant, other persons including Vinod Kumar, Nitesh Kumar, Baljit Singh, Harish Goyal arrived there who somehow got managed to leave the complainant from the petitioner and co-accused otherwise the complainant would have been killed by the accused persons. Thereafter, the complainant got himself medically examined and when he went to lodge the report, his report was not lodged in the police station and thereafter also he made several efforts to lodge the case against the accused but all were in vail, hence he lodged the instant application before the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Commission, Uttaranchal, Dehradun, on the basis of which the case was registered against the accused persons. Thereafter the matter was investigated and during investigation, the I.O. collected the evidence against the petitioners and other co- accused and filed the charge sheet against them before the court concerned. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate after analyzing the entire facts and circumstances of the case, took cognizance and proceeded to summon the petitioner and co-accused u/s 452/323/504/506 IPC and 3(1)(10) of 3 SC/ST Act vide order dated 18.05.2005. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has filed this application. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that no offence is made out against him and the petitioner has been wrongly summoned by the court below. I do not find any force in this argument for the reason that on a perusal of the application filed by the complainant before the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Commission, Uttaranchal Dehradun, on the basis of which the FIR was lodged, the statement of the complainant Babul Singh and that of the witnesses, namely, Nitesh Kumar, Harish Kumar, Vinod Kumar, Prem Singh, Naresh Kumar, Ram Singh and other witnesses recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C., who in their statements have amply corroborated the prosecution story, the offences punishable u/s 452/323/504/506 IPC and one punishable u/s 3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act, are prima facie made out against the petitioner on the basis of the above-said discussion and the trial court has rightly proceeded to summon the petitioner to face trial. Even otherwise, the trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence of the complainant as well as of the accused persons 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 of the Cr.P.C., this 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 the trial court. If the allegations made in the FIR as well as the statements of the complainant and that of other witnesses recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. 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 4 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. For the reasons recorded above, there is no force in the application. The application C482 is devoid of merits and is hereby dismissed. Interim order dated 18.10.2005 is vacated. (Dharam Veer, J.) July 16, 2010 Rdang