Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:UHC:6579 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
25.02.2025
C482 No. 1785 of 2016 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. Abhishek Verma, learned counsel for the applicants.
2. Mr. Deepak Bisht and Mr. B.N. Maulakhi, learned Deputy A.G. for the State.
3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 02.12.2016 passed in Criminal Case No. 4809 of 2016, State Vs. Prem Prakash & Others, under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 I.P.C., pending in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, as well as the entire criminal proceedings of the aforesaid case.
4.
Brief facts of the case, as borne out from the record, are that an FIR was lodged by respondent no.2 on 18.12.2015, alleging that one co-accused, namely Prem Prakash Tiwari, had sold the property of the Society to different persons. Pursuant to the said FIR, after completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against the applicant. On that basis, the learned 4th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun took cognizance and summoned the applicant to face trial under Sections 420, 467, 468, and 471 I.P.C. vide the impugned order dated
02.12.2016.
5.
Learned counsel for the applicants would submit that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the case; that, the entire proceedings are misconceived and based on a civil dispute which has been given a criminal colour; that the Investigating Officer filed the charge sheet without conducting a proper and impartial investigation; and that the trial court passed the impugned summoning order in a mechanical manner without due application of judicial mind, therefore, the entire proceedings are unsustainable in the eyes of law and deserve to be quashed. 6. Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that the trial court has passed the impugned summoning/cognizance order after duly considering the material on record; that, the interim stay granted by this
2025:UHC:6579 Court on 27.12.2016 was vacated by the Coordinate Bench on 09.08.2024, and as such, the trial is proceeding. Therefore, the present application has become infructuous. 7. Learned State counsel would further submit that the police conducted thorough investigations and submitted final reports, and that the courts below have passed reasoned orders after due application of mind. He would further submit that the present application involves disputed questions of fact and evidentiary issues, which cannot be adjudicated in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., and are to be addressed during trial. 8. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9. A perusal of the order sheet would reveal that the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.08.2024 vacated the interim stay order dated 27.12.2016, thereby allowing the trial to proceed. It is a well-settled legal principle that the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection and in rarest of rare cases, to prevent abuse of the process of court or to secure the ends of justice. These powers are not intended to be used to re-appreciate evidence or substitute the findings of fact already arrived at by the subordinate courts. 10. In the present case, the contentions raised by the applicant involve disputed questions of fact and issues requiring appreciation of evidence, which are to be adjudicated during the course of trial and such matters cannot be examined by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
11. In view of the above, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case where the power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised.
12. Accordingly, the C-482 application is dismissed. 13. No order as to costs. 14. It is made clear that the court below shall decide the case on its own merits, in accordance with law, without being influenced by any observations made by this Court in this order. (Alok Mahra, J.)
25.07.2025 Mamta
2025:UHC:6579