IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARKHAND AT NAINITAL C-482 No. 45 of 2006 Umesh Sethi and others ………..Applicants. Versus State of Uttaranchal and others. …..Respondents. Present: None appears on behalf of the applicants. Mr. Nandan Arya, AGA for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate for respondent no. 3. Date of Decision : 16 .9.2010 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J (Oral) 1. List revised. Case called out twice. None appears on behalf of the applicants. 2. Mr. Nandan Arya, AGA for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent no. 1 and Mr. Vinod Sharma, Advocate for respondent no. 3 are present in the Court. 2. This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants challenging the charge sheet and the subsequent summoning order dated 12.1.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh, District Haridwar in Criminal Case No. 1102 of 2005 State Vs. Umesh Sethi and another under Section 420, 406 & 506 I.P.C. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:- An FIR was lodged on 8.5.2005 by respondent no. 3 against the applicants, inter alia, stating that the present applicants had taken a sum of Rs. 8,50,000/- from him, on insurance by them that the same will be invested and will be returned alongwith huge profits. Subsequently, when respondent no. 3 asked the accused persons/applicants to return his money, the request was refused. 4. Earlier an FIR was lodged against the applicants under Section 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., which was registered as Case Crime No. 205/2005, P.S. Rishikesh, district Dehradun. Against this FIR, the applicants had filed a writ petition being Criminal Writ Petition (MB) No. 470 of 2005 before this Court and the Division Bench of this Court itself stated that subject to payment of a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- by the applicants to 2 respondent no. 3, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants. It is also the admission of learned counsel for respondent no. 3 that a sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- has been received by respondent no. 3. The matter pertains to the year 2006. 5. On the basis of the admission made by the learned counsel for respondent no. 3 itself it is clear that no offence is made out against the applicants, at least under Section 420 of Cr.P.C. Hence, the proceedings initiated against the applicants under Section 420 of Cr.P.C. are hereby set aside. 6. Perused the charge-sheet as well as the FIR dated 8.5.2005. There is no good ground for interference by this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for setting aside the proceedings under Sections 406, 506 I.P.C. The proceedings against the applicants under Sections 406, 506 I.P.C. shall go on. 7. The instant C-482 application is only partly allowed to the extent noted above. No order as to costs. 8. Interim order dated 12.1.2006 is also vacated. 9. The Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Court concerned for necessary compliance. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J) 16.9.2010 Rathour