Neetu And Others –Applicants vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 1 April, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

Neetu And Others –Applicants vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another on 1 April, 2025

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

                                                         2025:UHC:2370
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 1409 of 2022
Neetu and Others                                       --Applicants
                          Versus
State Of Uttarakhand and Another                    --Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-
       Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for applicants.
       Mr. Shailendra Singh Chauha, learned D.A.G. with Mr. Vikash
       Uniyal, learned Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand.
Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

Counter affidavit filed by the State is taken on
record. Miscellaneous application (IA/2/2022) made
therefor, is allowed.

2. By means of the present C482 application, the
applicants have put to challenge the charge-sheet dated
06.12.2021, cognizance/summoning order dated
17.02.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First,
Haridwar in Criminal Case No.65 of 2022 State Vs. Neetu
and Others, for the offences punishable under Sections
323, 504, 506, 452 and 427 of IPC, Case crime No.400 of
2020 registered with Police Station Bahadarabad,
District Haridwar as well as the entire proceedings of
aforesaid criminal case.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the
respondent No.2 has lodged an FIR on 09.11.2020
against the applicants alleging therein that on
02.11.2020, applicant No.1, who is neighbour of
respondent No.2, has broken the electric meter and on
being asked the cause, applicants abused respondent
No.2 and also committed maarpeet with him, his wife
and mother, due to which, they had sustained injuries
on their body. The respondent No.2 through

1
2025:UHC:2370
telephonically narrated the said incident to police station
who has sent the police force on the spot. Thereafter,
they all were got medically examined at Government
Hospital. After lodging the FIR, applicants filed a
criminal writ petition before this Court bearing No.638 of
2021, which was disposed of on the admission stage in
the light of judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court
in Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and Others reported
in (2014) 8 SCC 273 vide order dated 09.04.2021.
Thereafter, the Investigating Officer recorded the
statements of various persons and filed the charge-sheet
against the applicants on 06.12.2021. Thereafter,
learned Magistrate has summoned the present
applicants to face trial vide order dated 17.02.2022
under the aforementioned offences. Thus, the applicants
are before this Court.

5. It is contended by learned counsel for the
applicants that the applicants are innocent persons and
have been falsely implicated in the present case just for
village rivalry; they have no previous criminal history or
conviction to their credit. Learned counsel for the
applicants further contended that the respondent No.2
has prior enmity with the applicants, due to which, he
does not want that applicant No.2 doing his government
job peacefully, as the applicant No.2 was appointed as
Assistant Teacher in Government Primary School
Khatola, Block Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar,
vide order dated 18.11.2021. Learned counsel for the
applicants also submits that on the fateful date of
incident, no electric meter was broken by applicant No.1
nor the respondent No.2 has made complaint to the
Electricity Department for replacement of the electric
meter.

2

2025:UHC:2370

6. Per contra, learned State Counsel submits
that the Investigating Officer on the basis of oral as well
as documentary evidences found cogent and credible
evidence against the applicants, therefore, filed the
charge-sheet under the aforementioned Sections. He
further submits that Hon’ble Apex Court in catena of
judgments hold that in a proceeding under Section 482
Cr.P.C., the High Court will not enter into any finding of
facts or hold a parallel trial. Moreover, the applicants
have a remedy to raise all their plea before the learned
trial court during the framing of charge and get
themselves discharge from all the aforementioned
Sections.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties
and having gone through the entire material available on
record, it transpires that prima-facie from the FIR, the
offences alleged against the applicants, are made out and
there are various disputed question of facts. This Court
while invoking the jurisdiction under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C., cannot go into the disputed question of facts as
alleged. In order to make out a case for interference under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the applicants have to satisfy the
Court that even if the entirety of the case of the
prosecution has taken as true, no case is made out. But,
here this is not a case, therefore, this Court doesn’t
incline to interfere into the matter.

8. Accordingly, the C482 application is dismissed.

9. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.)
01.04.2025
PN

3