IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL. Criminal Misc. Application (C482) No. 132 of 2005 1. Bhadu S/o Shri Pooran Singh 2. Supa S/o Shri Pooran Singh 3. Keshru S/o Shri Pooran Singh 4. Kapil S/o Shri Keshru All R/o Village Naingoan, Patti Laloor, Tehsil Dhanaulti District Tehri Garhwal ………………..Applicants Versus 1. Surat Singh S/o Shri Pooran Singh R/o Village Naingoan, Patti Laloor, Tehsil Dhanaulti District Tehri Garhwal Presently reside at village Hudoly Tehsil Purola, District Uttarkashi. 2. Special Judicial Magistrate Purola, District Uttarkashi 3. State of Uttaranchal ………Opposite parties Shri L.K.Tiwari, Advocate, Holding Brief of Shri J.P. Joshi, counsel for the petitioners. Smt. Mamta Bisht, A.G.A., present for the respondent No.3 None present for the complainant even after service of notice on him. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973(for short Cr.P.C.) the petitioners have sought quashing of the summoning order dated 15.01.2005, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Purola, in criminal complaint case No. 2 of 2005, Surat Singh vs. Bhadu & others. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. None present for the complainant even after being sufficiently served. 3. Brief facts of the case are that complainant filed criminal complaint (copy Annexure-1 to the petition) before the Judicial Magistrate, Purola on 15.12.2004, with the allegation that on 6.12.2004, at about 9:30 P.M. accused petitioners namely Bhadu, Supa, Keshru, Kapil and Amit entered in his house and threatened the complainant and his family of dire consequences. The Magistrate recorded the statement of the complainant under section 200 of Cr.P.C, and that of the witnesses Indra Singh, Reena and Smt. Seema under section 202 of Cr.P.C. The Magistrate after going through the evidence collected in the enquiry, summoned the accused (present petitioners) in respect of offences punishable under section 452, 506 I.P.C. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the complainants and petitioners are close relatives. It is further pleaded that due to the enmity petitioners have been falsely implicated. 5. Whether the petitioners are innocent or not and whether they are falsely implicated or not are the questions of fact which can be examined by the trial court after recording evidence. It is not desirable on the part of this Court to go into the question of disputed facts with incomplete evidence before it. 6. Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners and after going through the statement of the complainant recorded under section 200 of Cr.P.C, and that of the witnesses Indira Singh, Reena and Smt. Seema under section 202 Cr.P.C, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the trial of the case. 7. Therefore, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C, is dismissed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt: 11.05.2010 parul