[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Uttarakhand High Court
C482/621/2021 on 7 April, 2026
2026:UHC:2454
Office Notes,
reports, orders
or proceedings
SL.
Date or directions COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
and Registrar's
order with
Signatures
C482 No.621 of 2021
Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.
Mr. V.K. Jemini and Mr. Ashish Kumar
Jemini, Advocates for the applicants.
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Joshi, A.G.A. for the
State of Uttarakhand.
2. Present C-528 application is filed with
the prayer to set-aside/quash the charge
sheet dated 28.01.2020, summoning order
dated 21.09.2020 and the entire
proceedings of Criminal Case No.3203 of
2020, pending in the Court of learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.
3. The F.I.R. lodged by respondent no.2
against the applicants alleges that the
brother of the informant had purchased a
plot situate at Siddhowala. On the date of
the alleged incident, the informant's brother
along with his children visited his residence
and parked a newly purchased vehicle in
front of the said plot. It is alleged that
applicant no.1, accompanied by the other
co-applicants, arrived at the spot, became
abusive, and assaulted the wife and
daughter of the informant as well as the
wife of his younger brother, with an alleged
intention to outrage their modesty. It is
further alleged that some substance was
sprayed into the informant's eyes causing
irritation, and the applicants allegedly
manhandled, abused, and threatened the
victims. Upon such assault, the informant
allegedly fled from the spot to save his life.
Thereafter, the Police conducted
investigation and filed the charge sheet
against the applicants.
4. A Coordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 26.03.2021 directed issuance of
notice to respondent no.2 and kept the
2026:UHC:2454
summoning order in abeyance. Notices
issued to respondent no.2 were served on
08.04.2021 but, despite service, no one has
appeared on behalf of the
complainant/respondent no.2.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants
contends that the F.I.R. is false, frivolous
and has been lodged with an ulterior motive
to harass the applicants and pressurize
them in connected civil disputes between
the parties. It is submitted that there exist
long-pending civil suits between the
families, one instituted by the grandmother
of applicant no.1 against the family of
respondent no.2, and another instituted by
respondent no.2 challenging a 1956 registry
of the grandfather of the applicants. It is
further submitted that no medical
examination report was filed along with the
F.I.R. to substantiate injuries.
6. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, reported in
1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335 has laid down that
the High Court may quash criminal
proceedings where the allegations, even if
taken at face value and accepted in their
entirety do not prima facie constitute a
recognizable offence, or where a criminal
charge is manifestly attended with mala fide
and/or where continuation of the
proceedings would amount to abuse of
process of any Court.
7. It is evident from the record that
respondent no.2 has not filed any medical
evidence alongside the F.I.R. to support the
serious allegations of assault and outrage of
modesty. The absence of medical evidence
seriously undermines the allegations of
physical assault, which are central to the
offence alleged. The cumulative assessment
of the record indicates that the dispute
between the parties is essentially civil in
nature, relating to property rights and title,
which has been pending for years. A civil
2026:UHC:2454
facet cannot be converted into a cognizable
criminal offence in the absence of any clear
and specific evidence showing commission
of a distinct criminal act. The allegations in
the F.I.R., carefully read, do not prima facie
disclose ingredients of offences as charged,
more particularly those involving assault
with intention to outrage modesty, prima
facie requiring corroborative medical
evidence or specific established intent. The
continuation of criminal proceedings, in the
background of an existing civil dispute and
in absence of cogent material disclosing
commission of a specific cognizable offence,
would result in abuse of the process of law
and would be oppressive to the applicants.
8. Considering the entirety of the
circumstances, including the complainant's
failure to appear despite service of notice,
the absence of any medical evidence to
substantiate the alleged assault, and the
predominantly civil nature of the underlying
dispute, the present Criminal Miscellaneous
Application merits allowance.
9. Accordingly, the present Criminal Misc.
Application is allowed and the entire
proceedings in Criminal Case No. 3203 of
2020 pending before the Court of learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun are
hereby quashed.
(Alok Mahra, J.)
07.04.2026
Arpan
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF
ARPAN JAISWAL
UTTARAKHAND,
2.5.4.20=eabb68a3895e41937c266c23964c0485365445e3a20dddb7393
398f9fe45ba3e, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=060FC17022BEAE3DE215D68D9D454C5109CB987446351
E4DF04AADAA2C2CEA66, cn=ARPAN JAISWAL
Date: 2026.04.07 17:59:42 +05'30'
