2025:UHC:4691 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 2233 of 2022 09 June, 2025 Gaurav Kumar --Applicant Versus State Of Uttarakhand Through Secretary Home Affairs Government Of U.k. Dehradun & another --Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Prince Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. S.C. Dumka, learned AGA along with Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. By means of present C482 application, applicant has put to challenge the charge-sheet dated 24.12.2020; summoning order dated 18.11.2021 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.607 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504 & 506 IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 2. Facts in brief are that respondent no.2 lodged the first information report against the applicant and two other persons on 16.11.2020 with the averment that on 14.11.2020, present applicant along with two others made objectionable remarks on her, when she objected, they started abusing her. Thereafter, she went home and informed her husband about the incident. Her husband 1 2025:UHC:4691 tried to convince them, but they started beating her husband. It is further alleged in the FIR that applicant broke the gold chain of her husband and it was only after the intervention of local people, their lives were saved. Even after the intervention, applicant and other persons threatened them to kill respondent no.2 and her husband. 3. After investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted by the police against the applicant on 24.12.2020. Thereupon, learned Magistrate issued summons to the applicant on 18.11.2021 in Criminal Case No.607 of 2021. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the entire prosecution story alleged in the FIR is totally false and different in the statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. He also submits that while taking cognizance, learned Magistrate failed to appreciate the material evidence collected by the Investigating Officer and passed the impugned summoning order. He further submits that there is no material evidence available against the applicant. 6. Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that the applicant has raised the serious disputed question of facts before this Court and the same can only be examined during course of trial. He further submits that the learned trial court after appreciating the evidence available on record rightly summoned the applicant. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the entire documents available on record. 2 2025:UHC:4691 8. From perusal of the FIR as well as the summoning order, prima facie, the commission of cognizable offence is made out against the applicant. Accordingly, no case is made out to interfere in the present C482 application and the same is dismissed. 9. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 09.06.2025 AK 3