IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 696 of 2005 Azahar Mohammad @ A.M. Raj S/o Mazahar Mohammad R/o 43 Gandhi Road Inamullah Building Dehradun … Applicant Vs 1. State of Uttaranchal 2. Sri Saifullah Khan S/o Somi Ullah Khan R/o 43 Gandhi Road Inamullah Building Dehradun … Opposite Parties Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. List has been revised. None has appeared on behalf of the petitioner/applicant before the Court to argue the case. Sri S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for the State and Ms. Sangeeta Bhardwaj, Advocate, holding brief of Sri R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the respondent No. 2 are present before the Court. 2. Heard learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record. 3. By means of this petition moved under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure1973 (for short Cr.P.C), the petitioner has sought quashing of the chargesheet dated 17.07.1999 as well as quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2008 of 2005, State Vs Azahar Mohammad pending in the court of Special Judicial Magistrate – I, Dehradun. 4. Having considered the submission advanced by learned A.G.A. and perusing the documents filed before me, I am of the view that there is no flagrant injustice and abuse of 2 process of court in this case. The evidences are incomplete and hazy as yet. The points raised in the petition are the disputed question of facts and it can be judged by the trial court where the evidence are yet to be collected. This Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not supposed to act as a trial judge. The averments made in the petition are the disputed question of fact, which can be assessed and judged by the trial court. I am not supposed to embark upon an enquiry with regard to the credibility of the evidence at this stage. Any judgment rendered by me would amount to premature judgment where the evidence is still incomplete and hazy. The applicant shall have an opportunity to place the evidence in their defence before the trial court where the matter shall be finally adjudicated after considering the entire evidence. I do not find any merit in this case at this stage. 5. Accordingly, the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed. 6. Consequently, the stay order dated 07.10.2005 stands vacated. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 09.07.2010 ASWAL