Uttarakhand High Court
Unknown vs State Of Uttarakhand on 9 May, 2025
Author: Pankaj Purohit
Bench: Pankaj Purohit
2025:UHC:3739
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 2174 of 2022
09th May, 2025
Radheshyam ............Applicant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand
and another ...........Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
Mr. R.K. Rawat, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Sanjeev Singh,
Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. S.S. Chauhan, D.A.G. with Mr. Vikas Uniyal, B.H. for the
State.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.
This C482 application is directed against the
order dated 27.07.2022, passed by learned Ist Additional
Sessions Judge, Haridwar in Criminal Revision No.264 of
2021 as well as order dated 02.02.2019, passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar in Complaint Case No.267 of
2016, whereby the applicant has been summoned to face
the trial under Sections 323, 504 and 506 of IPC.
2. Facts of the case in a nutshell are that a
complaint was filed by respondent no.2 herein before the
trial court with the averments that an agreement was
executed between the complainant and the applicant along
with one another person for a hotel wherefor the monthly
rent at the rate of ₹70,000/- besides ₹3,00,000/- as
security was fixed.
3. For some reason the hotel of the complainant
could not succeed, hence by way of cancellation of an
aforesaid agreement the respondent no.2 got possession of
the hotel, however he did not return the security deposit of
₹3,00,000/-. On 16.05.2018 at about 08:30 P.M the
2025:UHC:3739
applicant along with other accused came at the house of
the complainant being armed with baton and sticks and
soon after reaching the house of the complainant began to
hurl abuses and committed maarpeet with him with the
weapons held by them. As a result thereof the complainant
sustained injuries on his hands and feet, but somehow the
complainant could be saved.
4. The complainant in support of his complaint
himself examined under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and two
witnesses were examined under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and on
the basis of their evidence the trial court proceeded to
summon the applicant to face the trial by way of order
dated 02.02.2019.
5. Challenging the said order the applicant
preferred a revision which was also met with the same fate
vide judgment and order dated 27.07.2022, passed by
learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haridwar.
Challenging both the orders, the present C482 application
has been filed.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued
that the courts' below erred in law in summoning the
accused as there was no evidence against him; orders
passed by the courts' below suffers from infirmity.
7. On the other hand, learned State counsel
supported the orders passed by the courts' below.
8. Having perused the judgment and orders under
challenge, it appears that prima facie a case is made out
against the applicant. For this very reason the trial court
has summoned the applicant. If the applicant has strict
belief over his wrong involvement in the case, he could
prove his innocence before the trial court by way of
adducing evidence.
2025:UHC:3739
9. This Court in exercise of power under Section
482 Cr.P.C. is not supposed to check the nitty gritty of the
case as pointed out by learned counsel for the applicant.
10. Moreover it is trite law that the power under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used very sparingly; however
keeping in mind facts of the case, this Court is of the view
that this case does not fall in the category of 'rarest of rare
cases'.
11. In view of what has been stated above, this
Court finds no force in the present C482 application and
the same is accordingly dismissed.
12. A copy of this judgment by sent to trial court
concerned to proceed with the trial expeditiously.
(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
09.05.2025
SK
