Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3253 (UTT)

FARMAN v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

C528/219/2025 · 2025-03-20

Vivek Bharti Sharma

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:UHC:1984 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS 20.03.2025 C528/219/2025 Hon’ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J. Mr. Piyush Sammal, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Mr. Deepak Bisht, learned Deputy A.G. for the State. 3. Present petition is filed under Section 528 B.N.S.S. to quash the charge sheet and impugned summoning order dated 10.07.2024 passed in Criminal Case No. 815 of 2024 by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused would submit that the petitioner is an innocent person and has falsely been implicated in the instant crime; that, PW1/victim and PW2/father of the victim have turned hostile, therefore, nothing has remained in this case and the entire criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that important witnesses are yet to be examined; that, the criminal proceedings cannot be quashed solely because the victim turned hostile, as the prosecution's case may still be supported by other evidence, and quashing would be a travesty of justice; that, the grounds taken in the petition are the matter of evidence, which cannot be appreciated by this Court at this stage, thus, the petitioner/accused is not entitled for any relief at this stage. 6. Perused the record in the light of above 2025:UHC:1984 submissions made by counsel for the parties. 7. This is not a healthy practice that when one or two witnesses have gone hostile for the reason of being managed by the accused or otherwise then the accused immediately approach the High Court for quashing of the F.I.R. because the truth comes only after appreciation of all the evidences and the petitioners/accused should wait for conclusion of the trial. 8. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered view that the power entrusted with the High Court under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is to do justice when there is a illegality on the face of the record itself and the present case is not a fit case for quashing the charge-sheet and criminal proceedings stated above. 9. Accordingly, the C-528 petition is dismissed in limine. (Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.) 20.03.2025 Mamta 2025:UHC:1984