IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No.1018 of 2010 (U/s 482 of Cr.P.C.) Gopal Krishna and another …………Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …………Respondents Dated: October 26, 2010 HON. DHARAM VEER, J. Heard Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate for the applicants and Mr. M.A. Khan, Brief Holder for the State. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), the applicants have sought quashing of charge sheet and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2986 of 2010, State v. Sandeep Saxena and others, relating to offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, IPC). Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.3 lodged an FIR against the applicants and others alleging that the marriage of his daughter was solemnized with the co-accused Sandeep Saxena on 11.2.2008 in Kashipur. It is alleged that after the marriage in-laws of his daughter started harassing her mentally and physically for dowry. On 27.7.2008 at about 9 PM the applicants and other co-accused beaten his daughter and ousted her for the demand of ` 5,00,000/-. A case of this incident was filed by his daughter under Domestic Violence Act before learned A.C.J.M., Kashipur, and in which the applicants and co-accused accepted their offence and filed a compromise stating therein that in future they will never tried to harass the daughter of complainant. After that his daughter went back with her husband and started living separately. It is 2 further alleged that other family members of her in laws used to come to her house and also used to stay there for 2-4 days. After some time the applicants and others started harassing her again and started giving intoxicated injection with intention to kill her. It is further alleged that on 16.8.2010 the present applicants and others abused his daughter and beaten her with belts and ultimately ousted her from the house for the demand of ` 5,00,000/-. With these averments, respondent no.3 lodged the FIR against the applicants and others. After lodging of the FIR, the matter was investigated and on completion, charge sheet was submitted against the applicants and others. Consequent to submission of charge sheet, vide order dated 14.9.2010 learned Addl. CJM, Kashipur, took cognizance of the offence and summoned the applicants and others. Feeling aggrieved, the present applicants have preferred this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court. From a perusal of the contents of the first information report; statement of witness recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and other papers available in file, I am of the view that prima facie a case under the aforesaid sections is made out against the applicants. 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 FIR and the statement of witnesses recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. and other evidence collected by the I.O. during investigation are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, I am of the view that the charge sheet is rightly submitted against the applicants and the 3 applicants have accordingly 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 C482 application is devoid of merit and is hereby dismissed in limine. (Dharam Veer, J.) 26.10.2010 RG