JUDGMENT : ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. Heard the parties. 2. Since both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed with the self-same prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 04.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 1432 of 2023 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih has found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 447, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and issued summons against the petitioners. Hence, both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are disposed of by this common judgment. 3. The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant entrusted her house to the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 for using the same for his residence only and to carry out his own business. The petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 was entrusted with the said house property of the complainant in the year 2018. The petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024, at the time of entrustment of the said house property, took the same for only some months and assured that he will vacate the property after some months. As after one year from the date of occupation, the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 did not vacate the said house. The complainant and her husband requested the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 to vacate the said house but the said petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 refused to vacate the house and committed criminal intimidation by threatening the complainant and her husband to kill if they insist upon vacation of their house by the said petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. Further, the said petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 used the entrusted property in violation of the legal contract by further sub-letting the property entrusted with the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. The petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 has been arrayed as an accused in this case only because she is the wife of the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. The petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 has been arrayed as an accused in this case only because she is the wife of the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. On the basis of the Complaint, the statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the inquiry witnesses, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih found prima facie case for the offences punishable under Section 406, 447, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and passed the summoning order against them. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners of both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions submits that there is absolutely no allegation in respect of the said offences against any of the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No. 1874 of 2024 or the petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. Hence, even if the entire allegations made in the Complaint, the statement on solemn affirmation of the complainant and the statement of the inquiry witnesses are considered to be true in their entirety, still none of the offences in respect of which the prima facie case has been found out by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih is not made out against them. It is next submitted that so far as the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is concerned, the allegations against him are out and out false. It is then submitted that the undisputed fact remains that the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is the son of the husband of the complainant from his first wife, who has been divorced by the husband of the complainant but the undisputed fact also remains that he is the own son of the husband of the complainant. It is further submitted that prior to institution of this case, the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 lodged Giridih (Town) P.S. Case No. 16 of 2021 against the complainant and others in which case, police submitted charge sheet finding the allegations to be true and cognizance of the offences punishable under Section 341, 323, 325, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken inter alia against the complainant. It is also submitted that the said petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 also filed Original Suit No. 10 of 2020 in the court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division-I), Giridih against the husband of the complainant and others for declaration of right, title and interest to the property but in the plaint, in the description of the property at item No. 2, the name of the place and district has not been mentioned. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been residing in the place of occurrence house with his mother in his own independent house. Hence, it is submitted that the allegations against the petitioners being false, the entire criminal proceedings be quashed and set aside against the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No.1857 of 2024 as well. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed. 5. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 of both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions on the other hand fairly submit that there is no allegation of entrustment of any property by the complainant to all the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No. 1874 of 2024 and to the petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 nor is there any allegation against them of either intentionally insulting the complainant, criminally intimidating the complainant or trespassing to the place of occurrence house; but so far as the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 that the only contention of the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is that the allegation against him is false; which is the defence of the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 and which the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024, can take during the trial of the case. It is next submitted that this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cannot conduct a mini trial to ascertain the veracity of the defence of the petitioner to give a finding, when prosecution evidence is yet to begin and the charge has not yet been framed. It is next submitted that this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cannot conduct a mini trial to ascertain the veracity of the defence of the petitioner to give a finding, when prosecution evidence is yet to begin and the charge has not yet been framed. Hence, it is submitted that Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024, being without any merit, be dismissed, so far as the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is concerned. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that as has fairly been submitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, that there is no allegation against all the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No. 1874 of 2024 and the petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 of being entrusted with any property. In the absence of the same, this Court has no hesitation in holding that even if the entire allegations made against them are considered to be true in their entirety, still the offence punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out against them. Similarly, there is absolutely no allegation against them of either committing criminal intimidation or intentionally insulting or committing criminal trespass and in the absence of such allegations, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the offences punishable under Section 447, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code are also not made out against all the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No. 1874 of 2024 as well as the petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. Hence, continuation of the criminal proceeding against them will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 04.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 1432 of 2023 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih, be quashed and set aside against all the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No. 1874 of 2024 as well as the petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. 7. Therefore, this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 04.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 1432 of 2023 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih, be quashed and set aside against all the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No. 1874 of 2024 as well as the petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. 7. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 04.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 1432 of 2023 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih, is quashed and set aside against all the petitioners of Cr.M.P. No. 1874 of 2024 as well as the petitioner No.2 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. 8. So far as the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is concerned, the only contention of the said petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is that the allegations against him are false. It is a settled principle of law that the High Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cannot consider the defence of the accused person or the veracity of the evidence put forth by the accused as that would be the job of the trial court as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Awadh Kishore Gupta & Others reported in 2004 2 Supreme 501 . 9. It is also a settled principle of law that no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh & Another vs. Akhil Sharda & Others reported in 2022 LiveLaw SC 594, the relevant portion of which reads as under :- “ Having gone through the impugned judgment and order passed by the High court has set aside the criminal proceedings in exercise of powers under Section 482 CrPC, it appears that the High Court has virtually conducted a mini trial, which as such is not permissible at this stage and while deciding the application under Section 482CrPC. As observed and held by this court in a catena of decisions, no mini trial can be conducted by the High Court in exercise of power under Section 482CrPC, jurisdiction and at the stage of deciding the application under Section 482CrPC, the High Court cannot get into appreciation of evidence of the particular case being considering. (Emphasis supplied)” 10. Now coming to the facts of the case, there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 of committing the offences in respect of which the prima facie case is found out by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih but the only contention of the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is that the same is false and concocted one. The same is the defence of the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 and the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is at liberty to raise such defence during the full-dress trial of the case but certainly the same is not a ground to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 04.08.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 1432 of 2023 by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Giridih against the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that there is no justifiable reason to accede to the prayer of the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 11. Accordingly, Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024, being without any merit, is dismissed so far as the petitioner No.1 of Cr.M.P. No. 1857 of 2024 is concerned. 12. Both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are disposed of accordingly.