IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Recall/ Restoration Application No. 319 of 2011 Delay Co ndonation Application No. 507 of 2011 In CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION (C-482) No. 633 of 2006 Usha Kapoor, aged about 41 years W/o Shri Puran Chandra Kapoor R/o Village Gouja Jali, Uttar Haldwani, Nainital ………………..Petitioner Versus 1. State of Uttaranchal (now state of Uttarakhand) 2. Kailash Chandra Pandey S/o Shri Jai Dutt Pandey R/o Sipahidhara, Nainital presently residing at Flat No. 34 Sector 2 Pocket 1 Dwarika, New Delhi …………. Respondents Shri Rajesh Joshi, Advocate, present for the petitioner Shri P.S.Bohara, Brief Holder, present for the State. Shri Sanjeet Sah, Advocate, present for the complainant Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. This is Delay Condonation Application No. 507 of 2011 for condonation of delay in filing the Restoration Application. (2) Delay Condonation Application No. 507 of 2011 is allowed. Delay is condoned. (3) Heard, on Restoration /Recall Application No. 319 of 2011, and perused the affidavit. (4) In view of principle of law laid down in Madhumilan Syntex Ltd. And others Vs. Union of India and Another 2007 AIR SCW Page 1971 the Restoration Application No. 319 of 2011 is allowed on the condition that the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C, shall be heard on merits today. (5) Heard on merits of the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. (6) The petitioner has challenged the charge sheet filed by the police against the three accused including the petitioner in respect of offences punishable under section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B I.P.C., pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani. (7) The allegations against the accused are that property belonging to another person was sold by committing fraud and forgery by the three accused. (8) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has no role in commission of crime. (9) Whether the petitioner's complicity is there or not, and if so to what extent, can be examined only by the trial court after recording the evidence. This court in its jurisdiction under section 482 of Cr.P.C., is not inclined to give findings as to the innocence of the petitioner. (10) Therefore, the petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C is dismissed, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case pending before the trial court. It is observed that if the petitioner Usha Kapoor surrenders before the court concerned her bail application shall be heard and disposed of without unreasonable delay. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt.20.05.2011 Nahid