2025:UHC:5793 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS C482/1661/2017 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. K.K. Harbola, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. along with Mr. Prabhat Kandpal, learned Brief Holder for the State. 3. Mr. G.C. Lakhchaura, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 4. Present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the charge-sheet and the summoning/cognizance order dated 05.10.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhikiyasain, District Almora in Criminal Case No. 113 of 2017, under Sections 323 and 504 I.P.C., as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the litigation against the present applicant started long back in the year 2011; that, the respondent no.2 made a false and fabricated representation before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, District Almora seeking an inquiry against the then Village Pradhan regarding alleged irregularities in works undertaken under various government schemes who is real brother-in-law (Jeth) of the present applicant. 6. He would further submit that based on a complaint lodged by the applicant, an inquiry was initiated which revealed significant financial irregularities on the part of the Village Pradhan. An FIR under Section 409 I.P.C. was registered against him, and proceedings in that case are stated to be still pending. It is contended that the present case has been instituted by respondent no.2 with mala fide intention, solely to harass and exert undue pressure on the applicant, and that the allegations made are false. The applicant claims to be innocent and falsely implicated. 2025:UHC:5793 7. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent no.2 would vehemently oppose the application submitting that respondent no.2 is a social welfare activist and a retired member of the Indian Army, who has been working for public welfare. It is alleged that the applicant, in collusion with the Village Pradhan, has committed multiple financial irregularities and misappropriated public funds. 8. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 would also submit that the Investigating Officer, upon completion of investigation, filed the charge-sheet against the applicant and that the trial court took cognizance after examining the available material on record. He would further submit that the grounds raised in the present application pertain to factual disputes and matters of evidence, which are to be adjudicated during trial and not under the limited scope of Section 482 Cr.P.C. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. It is well settled that the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be exercised sparingly and with great caution, only to prevent abuse of the process of the court or to secure the ends of justice. 11. Having considered the submissions and the material on record, this Court is of the view that the contentions raised by the applicant are, at best, his defence, and are matters of evidence that can only be appreciated during trial and such issues cannot be examined by this Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 12. In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present application. 13. Accordingly, the C-482 application is dismissed. 14. However, it is clarified that the trial court shall decide the case strictly in accordance with law and on its own merits, uninfluenced by any observations made in this order. 15. No order as to costs. (Alok Mahra, J.) 04.07.2025 Mamta 2025:UHC:5793