2025:UHC:4751 HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No.2340 of 2023 09th June, 2025 Surya Prakash Pharse ……..Applicant Versus State of Uttarakhand and another ………..Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Birendra Singh Adhikari, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Vikas Uniyal and Mr. Chitrarth Kandpal, B.H.s’ for the State. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. This application has been preferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is directed against the charge sheet dated 11.03.2023, cognizance order dated 06.05.2023, passed by learned IIIrd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Criminal Case No.3116 of 2023, whereby the applicant has been summoned to face the trial for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC as well as for quashing the entire proceedings of the Criminal Case No.3116 of 2023, State Vs. Surya Prakash Pharse, pending in the court of learned IIIrd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. 2. Facts of the case in a nutshell are that an F.I.R. was lodged by respondent no.2 herein against the applicant stating that the applicant is land mafia. The thrust of the allegation levelled in the F.I.R. is that the applicant sold the entire land in dispute showing 37 co-tenure holders having the power of attorney to sell the aforesaid land. However the fact of the matter is that actually there were many tenure holders of the land and thus the applicant by means of cheating and forgery executed sale deed without there being power of attorney of nine tenure holders. Consequent 1 2025:UHC:4751 upon the said F.I.R. the case was registered against the applicant and on completion of investigation a charge sheet was submitted against him in the court. On the said charge sheet cognizance was taken by the learned trial court and it summoned the applicant to face the trial. Hence, this application for aforesaid relief. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.2 wherein the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. have been reiterated and it is stated that in view of the fact that the applicant by way of cheating and forgery executed the sale deed of all the land showing 37 tenure holders while the land was actually in the name of 75 tenure holders. 4. Khatoni of subject land has been annexed with the counter affidavit. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties. 6. The fact as to whether the applicant was actually having the title, ownership or right to sell the subject piece of land can be decided only after the parties are given an opportunity to lead their evidence. This Court cannot go into factual aspect of the matter without evidence. As to whether the offence is made out or not can be decided by the trial court on the basis of the evidence produced by the parties. 7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that sifting of evidence cannot be done by this Court while sitting in 482 Cr.P.C. This is not a case where any interference is made out. This C482 application is devoid of merit and the same is dismissed. The case does not fall in the “rarest of rare” category as well to invoke inherent jurisdiction of this Court. 2 2025:UHC:4751 8. Interim order dated 11.12.2023 is hereby vacated. (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 09.06.2025 SK 3