IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 378 of 2005 Godhan Singh …Applicant Versus State and another …Respondents Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. List has been revised. None has appeared on behalf of applicant/petitioner. 2- Heard learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available before me. 3- Perusal of the record reveals that order dated 14.12.2004 was passed by the Sub District Magistrate thereby granting permission to respondent no. 2 to carry pipeline. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed revision before the court of learned Sessions Judge, who dismissed the revision vide judgment and order dated 01.04.2005. Feeling aggrieved by revisional court’s order, the petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court for quashing the same. 4- Having considered the entire material available on record, I am of the view that I do not find any abuse of process of court in the order passed by the Sessions Judge. In this case, no flagrant injustice appears to have been caused to the petitioner. The entire evidence has to be assessed by the trial court where the evidence is still to be adduced. This court is not supposed to embark upon an enquiry with regard to allegations levelled against the 2 petitioner at this stage. Any judgment rendered by this Court would amount to pre-trial. There is nothing on record which may indicate that the court below by summoning the petitioner 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. Stay order dated 12.02.2008 stands vacated. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) 09-07-2010 SP