IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application(C482) No. 473 of 2010 1. Paramjeet S/o Jai Dev (Juvenile) 2. Jai Dev R/o Railway Colony, Haldwani Police Station Haldwani/GRP Kathgodam District Nainital ……..…Applicants Versus 1. State of Uttarakhand through Secretary Home Government of Uttarakhand, Dehradun. 2. Amul Vishwash S/o Shri Shastivar Vishwash R/o Tanakpur Road (Rampura) Haldwani, District Nainital. .....……Opposite Parties Shri R.S. Sammal, Advocate, present for the petitioners. Shri B.S. Parihar, Advocate, present for the State. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, (for short Cr.P.C,) the petitioner has sought 2 quashing of the proceedings of criminal case No. 2129 of 2008, Amul Vishwash vs. Jai Dev & others, relating to offences punishable under section 302, 328 I.P.C, P.S. Haldwani, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that after the death of one Rakesh, a first information report was lodged by the complainant Amul Vishwash, which was registered as crime no. 1619 of 2007, relating to offences punishable under section 328, 302 I.P.C, against the petitioners. However, after investigation, the police submitted final report, as it found that the deceased had committed suicide. It is contended that the Magistrate has committed grave error of law in summoning the petitioners by entertaining the protest petition as criminal complaint. 4. From papers on record, it appears that after final report is submitted by the Investigating Officer the Magistrate issued notices to the complainant who filed the protest petition. On said protest petition the petitioner recorded statement of PW1 Amul Vishwash under section 200 of Cr.P.C, and that of the witnesses PW2 Ramesh Pal, PW3 Ashok Kumar, PW4 Dr. 3 S.C.Koranga, PW5 Kalidas and PW6 constable Mohan Singh Bora under section 202 of Cr.P.C. On the basis of the statement of the witnesses and after perusing the post-mortem report the Chief Judicial Magistrate summoned the petitioner to face the trial in respect of offences punishable under section 302, 328 I.P.C. 5. Attention of this Court is drawn to the fact that, PW3 Ashok Kumar Gupta who states that he saw the petitioner taking dead body and throwing it, had not made any such statement to the police at the time of the investigation. It is further submitted that the deceased wanted to marry Pinki (daughter of the petitioner no. 2 Jai Dev) but he was not obliged by the petitioner on which he committed suicide. 6. Having considered submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after going through papers on record this Court is of the view that the correctness of the testimony of PW3 Ashok Kumar and defence that the deceased committed suicide on being unsuccessful to marry the daughter of the petitioner no. 2, are the questions of fact which can be better examined by the trial court. It is not desirable on the part of this Court to hold either way as to the correctness of the factual aspects of the matter. 4 7. Therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the final merits of the case, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C, is dismissed with the observation that if the petitioners surrender before the court concerned their bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. As to the fact whether petitioner no. 1 is juvenile or not, application may be moved before the Juvenile Justice Board. The petition stands disposed of. (Prafulla C.Pant,J) Dt. 01.06.2010 Parul