IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL C-482 No. 634 of 2010 Sadhu Ram …..Applicant Versus Vinod Pal. ..Respondent. Present: Mr. S. K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the applicant. Date of Decision: 27.08.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J Heard Mr. S. K. Agrawal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate for the applicant. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant challenging the summoning order dated 19.06.2009 which has been issued to the applicant and the subsequent proceedings in Criminal Complaint Case No. 649 of 2009 Vinod Pal Vs. Sadhuram & others under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate (J.M.) Roorkee, District Haridwar. The summons have been issued after adopting the due process and after appreciating the material as well as the evidence on record and after taking recourse under Sections 200 and 202 of Cr.P.C. . All the same, the primary contention of the applicant before this Court is that what goes to the root of the present matter is a civil dispute whereby a land which was Khasra No.313/15 and where the possession of the applicant has been recorded. This order has been passed by Consolidation Officer, Haridwar under Section 9-A(2) of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (from hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The contention of the applicant is that the order is appealable under Section 11(2) of the Act, before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation. Therefore, the principal contention of the applicant is that the dispute being of civil nature bringing into operation the criminal machinery is a patent abuse of the process of the Court. Earlier the said complaint was dismissed under Section 323 of Cr.P.C. by learned Magistrate. Subsequently, the complainant moved a revision and in the revision, the matter was remanded to the authorities for the adjudication afresh. It was subsequent to these orders that the Magistrate has passed this impugned order dated 19.6.2009. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties the Court is of the considered view that the root of the matter is a civil matter which is relating to Khasra No.313/15 in which an order by statutory authority has been passed. Thus, the dispute being primarily of a civil nature where the complainant has a remedy to file an appeal, there does not appear any reason for taking cognizance by the learned Magistrate. The process adopted by the complainant appears to be patent abuse of process of law. Therefore, in order to secure the ends of justice, the order dated 19.06.2009 regarding the present applicant is set aside. The instant C-482 petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned for necessary compliance (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J) 27.08.2010 Kuldeep