2025:UHC:3604 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 1703 of 2023 06th May, 2025 Ved Gupta and others ………..Applicants Versus State of Uttarakhand and another …………Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Pawan Mishra, Advocate for the applicants. Mr. S.C. Dumka, A.G.A. with Ms. S.B. Dobhal, B.H. for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of the present C482 application, the applicant has prayed for quashing of charge sheet dated 26.02.2023 and cognizance order dated 22.05.2023, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun and proceedings of Criminal Case No.3419 of 2023, State Vs. Ved Gupta and other under Sections 147, 308 and 506 of IPC. 2. Facts of the case in brief are that applicant no.1 is owner of 0.0695 hectare land of Khasra No.542 situated at Mauza Arkedia Grant, Pargana Kendriyadoon, District Dehradun on which respondent no.2 and her family members want to take forceful possession. Applicant no.1 filed an original suit against family members of respondent no.2 seeking permanent injunction against them, which was registered as Original Suit No.2 of 2023, Ved Gupta Vs. Lalit Mohan and others in the court of learned IInd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Dehradun who passed an ad ex parte interim injunction against the defendants in the original suit vide its order 1 2025:UHC:3604 dated 03.01.2023. Despite injunction order respondent no.2 and her family members again tried to take forceful possession of land in question, but on the resistance of applicant no.1 they could not succeed, thereafter on 14.01.2023 at about 08:56 P.M. the respondent no.2 got an F.I.R. lodged against the applicants and other unknown accused persons in F.I.R. No.11 of 2023 under Sections 147, 307 and 504 of IPC at Police Station Prem Nagar, District Dehradun. During course of the investigation applicants filed anticipatory bail applications before the learned Sessions Judge, Dehradun, who allowed the same vide its orders dated 24.06.2023 and 27.06.2023. After the incident, a medical report of injured persons was prepared and the investigating officer recorded the statement of witnesses under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the Investigating Officer did not investigate the matter properly and in a routine manner and submitted the charge sheet dated 26.02.2023 against the applicants under Sections 147, 308 and 506 of IPC before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun who on the basis of said charge sheet vide its order dated 22.05.2023 took cognizance and summoned the applicants to face trial. 4. Per contra, learned State counsel submits that after appreciating the evidence and material available on record the trial court has rightly summoned the applicants. 5. Having considered the submission made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the records, this Court is convinced that trial court committed no irregularity in summoning the 2 2025:UHC:3604 accused/applicants vide the impugned summoning order. The F.I.R. report discloses the commission of cognizable offence and further on investigation the charge sheet has been submitted before the learned trial court. The learned counsel for the petitioner could not point out any strong reason to bring this case within the fold of “rarest of rare case” for warranting interference. 6. Accordingly the present C482 application is dismissed. 7. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 06.05.2025 SK 3