IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.755 OF 2006 (U/s 482 Of Cr.P.C.) Ali Hasan & others …………Applicants Versus State of Uttaranchal & another …………Respondents Dated: August 6, 2010 Sri Ramji Srivastavan, Adv. for the applicants Sri Prabhakar Joshi, Brief Holder for the State/respondent no.1 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 24.5.2006 as well as the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No.267 of 2006, Smt. Beena Vs. Ali Hasan & others, U/s 452/323/504/506 IPC, pending before CJM Uttarakashi. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. In brief, the case of the complainant/respondent no.2 is that she resides along with her mother at her parental house and the petitioners also reside adjacent to her house. On 19.4.2006 when the complainant’s mother had gone in the market, at about 5 PM, the petitioners threw dirty water and garbage in front of her house. When she refused the petitioners to it, the petitioners entered inside her house where they jostled with her and the petitioner Smt. Munni also threw slipper on the complainant’s head and also threatened to her life. The complainant tried to lodge the report on the same day but all was in vain, hence she moved the complainant before the court below. Vide order dated 24.5.2006, the court below after analyzing the entire evidence, summoned the petitioners u/s 452/323/504/506 IPC. Hence this petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that no offence is made out against them and the court below has wrongly summoned 2 them. I do not find any force in this argument for the reason that on a perusal of the complaint lodged by the respondent no.2, the statements of the complainant recorded u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and that of the witnesses, namely, Pappu and Talib, recorded u/s 202 Cr.P.C., I find that the offences punishable u/s 452/323/504/506 IPC are prima facie made out against the petitioners on the basis of the above-said discussion and the trial court has accordingly rightly summoned the petitioners to face trial. Even otherwise, the trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence of the complainant as well as that 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 complaint as well as the statements of complainant recorded u/s 200 and that of the witness recorded u/s 202 Cr.P.C., are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, I am of the view that the petitioners have rightly been summoned by the trial court. The trial court will decide the case after recording 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 accordingly dismissed. Interim order dated 14.11.2006 is vacated. (Dharam Veer, J.) August 6, 2010 Rdang