IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION NO.650 of 2005 (U/s 482 of Cr.P.C.) Islam Miyan …………Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand and another …………Respondents Dated: August 9, 2010 Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocate for the applicant Mr. Amit Bhatt, Addl. GA for the State Mr. Sayed Nadim, Advocate for respondent no.2 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, Cr.P.C.), the petitioner/applicant has sought quashing of the Criminal Complaint Case No.98 of 2005, Sunita Joshi v. Islam Miyan and others, relating to offences punishable under Sections 452/406/420/323/504/506 of IPC. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the affidavit, counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit. Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.2 Smt. Sunita Joshi filed a complaint before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar against the applicant and another stating therein that her husband had purchased a house from the applicant and had paid the entire sale consideration to the applicant but later on the applicant started asking to return the house to him. It is further stated that on 2.7.2003 at about 8 AM, the present applicant along with one Amanat Hussain, who was Sub Inspector in LIU Rudrapur, on the pretext of interrogation, took her husband in their office and detained her husband for two days and thereafter on 4.7.2003 at about 2 PM the 2 applicant and co-accused Amanat Hussain again came to her house and took search of the house and took into their possession articles worth Rs.50-60,000/- and told that these are related to the case and thereafter they sent her husband in the jail by implicating him in a false case. It is further alleged that on 15.1.2004 at about 8 PM, the applicant Islam Miyan and Amanat Hussain came to her house and enquired about her husband. She asked them to return their articles, on which, the applicant and the co- accused became annoyed and started hurling abuses to her and also told that being a Muslim, her husband is pretending to be a Hindu and threatened to kill her husband. When she resisted, they pushed her back due to which she fell down. On her alarm, Smt. Asha, Smt. Kamini Devi and Lalla Master reached on the spot. When the complainant tried to catch the applicant and co-accused, the accused persons slapped her and threatened to kill her husband in case she takes any action against the said incident. With these averments, this complaint was lodged by respondent no.2 Smt. Sunita in the court, which was registered as Criminal Complaint Case No.98 of 2005. The complainant, in support of her complaint, got herself examined u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and u/s 202 Cr.P.C. Smt. Asha Joshi and Smt. Kumudani @ Kamini were got examined. After hearing learned counsel for the complainant and perusing the material available, learned Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, vide order dated 26.4.2005 summoned the applicant Islam Miyan and another and criminal proceedings were subsequently initiated against them. Against the said criminal proceedings, the applicant has preferred the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court. From a perusal of the contents of the complaint as well as the statement of the complainant Smt. Sunita Joshi recorded u/s 200 Cr.P.C. and that of Smt. Asha Joshi and 3 Smt. Kamini recorded u/s 202 Cr.P.C. and after going through other papers available in file, I am of the view that prima facie a case under the aforesaid sections is made out against the applicant. Even otherwise, the trial court will decide the case after recording the evidence of the complainant as well as 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 and the statement recorded u/Ss 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, I am of the view that the applicant has rightly been summoned by the trial court and the criminal proceedings are accordingly rightly initiated against him. 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 C482 application, being devoid of merit, is dismissed accordingly. Interim order dated 23.9.2005 stands vacated. (Dharam Veer, J.) 9.8.2010 RG