IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 108 of 2005 Pankaj Bathla and others …Petitioners Versus State and another …Respondents Dated:16-04-2010 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioners have sought the relief for quashing the summoning order dated 19.01.2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No. 189 of 2005, Jasbir Singh vs. Pankaj Bathla and others, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and S.C.S.T. Act. 2- Brief facts of the case are that respondent no. 2 filed complaint case under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and S.C.S.T. Act in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur on 12.01.2005 against the petitioners, which was registered as Criminal Case No. 189 of 2005. The learned Magistrate finding prima facie case against the petitioners summoned them for the offence under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and S.C.S.T. Act vide order dated 19.01.2005. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have preferred the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court. 3- Heard Mr. Mohd. Azim, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. S.S. Adhikari, learned A.G.A. for 2 respondent no. 1 and perused the record. None has appeared on behalf of respondent no. 2. 4- The learned Magistrate has taken the cognizance in the matter after considering the entire material collected by the police during the course of investigation and no abuse of process of court would be caused to the accused petitioners, if the case proceeds before the trial court. The evidence in the case is still incomplete and hazy. This court is not supposed to embark upon an enquiry with regard to allegations levelled against the petitioners at this stage. Any judgment rendered by this Court would amount to pre-trial. It is the job of the trial judge to decide the matter on the basis of evidence to be colleted before it and then to decide the case on merits. However, I do not find any abuse of process of court and any flagrant injustice is to be caused to the petitioners at this stage, in case, if they face the trial before the trial court. There is nothing on record which may indicate that the court below by summoning the petitioners as accused has committed any manifest error which may warrant the interference of this Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 5- The petition lacks merit and is liable to be dismissed. 6- Accordingly, the petition is dismissed. The interim stay order, if any, stands vacated. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP